Zeitgeist Movie

DeBunny

nullzero wrote: »

Take the New World Order as an example if you will. Supposedly a small group of people run the wrold in every concievable way and have it in for the rest of us.
A small number of people do run the world, they're called rich people. Do they want to devastate the world population? Certain individuals say they do and have evidence to prove it. Popular opinion says that it isn't possible. Neither side is conclusive. On one side you have popular opinion saying one thing, on the other you have alternative opinion saying that popular opinion is wrong. Not all CT's are about events, by which I assume you mean the likes of 9-11 etc...
As for the lizard people, there's about as much proof to suggest they don't exist as their is to say they do; sweet FA. If that's conclusive and scientific I must have missed something. I think what you mean to say is that popular opinion says that reptilians don't exist.
I'm not hung up on the reptilian debate, I'm just using it as an example, although it is a fascinating subject in itself when you actually look at the historical context as oppossed to simply making a rushed judegment based on what is considered normal.

What I would suggest you should do is stop caring what people think about far out wacky conspiracy theories if it really bothers you that much.
I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can believe in any religious dogma but it's something I just have to accept. I cant bully my friends into agreeing with me just because their religious beliefs defy all logical reasoning. I just accept people for what they are. You can suggest to people that they change their beliefs to a more enlightened set of beliefs but if they don't want to it's not something you can force. You have to respect other peoples right to free will and therefore their right to have strange opinions. It would be a very dull and boring world if we all agreed with each other, it's also true that the world isn't improved any great deal by people forcing each other to share beliefs.

I wasn't talking about peoples personal beliefs. To paraphrase a famous quote ''I respect peoples right to have strange opinions, I am not obliged, however, to respect the strange opinions.'' I am not trying to force people to follow my beliefs. I am trying (and failing) to highlight the low standards in CT research and point out the difference between fact and opinion.

People can believe what they want. The problem I have is when opinions are used as facts or are called research. You've managed to blur the lines between the two yourself.

Do they want to devastate the world population? Certain individuals say they do and have evidence to prove it. Popular opinion says that it isn't possible. Neither side is conclusive. On one side you have popular opinion saying one thing, on the other you have alternative opinion saying that popular opinion is wrong

Proof, evidence and fact are not matters of opinion; unless we're discussing philosophy, but we're not.

Time and time again the standards in CT ''research'' fall far below the standards of every other form of research, except perhaps creationist research. They are similar in that both are dogmatic, illogical and quote facts completely out of context or just tell total lies. Both also have an unyielding, dogmatic and fervent following.

There are plenty of of CTs that deserve genuine and thorough research, however due to the horribly low standard of CT research, conspiracy has become a dirty word and it is very hard to be taken seriously when discussing CTs.

This is my question. Why should we accept such horribly low standards in CT research? It does not benefit anyone.

Btw it's a fact that the standards in CT research are low, not my opinion. Zeitgeist is a good example of something that shouldn't even be called research due to it's horribly low standards.

nullzero

DeBunny wrote: »

I wasn't talking about peoples personal beliefs. To paraphrase a famous quote ''I respect peoples right to have strange opinions, I am not obliged, however, to respect the strange opinions.'' I am not trying to force people to follow my beliefs. I am trying (and failing) to highlight the low standards in CT research and point out the difference between fact and opinion.

People can believe what they want. The problem I have is when opinions are used as facts or are called research. You've managed to blur the lines between the two yourself.



Proof, evidence and fact are not matters of opinion; unless we're discussing philosophy, but we're not.

Time and time again the standards in CT ''research'' fall far below the standards of every other form of research, except perhaps creationist research. They are similar in that both are dogmatic, illogical and quote facts completely out of context or just tell total lies. Both also have an unyielding, dogmatic and fervent following.

There are plenty of of CTs that deserve genuine and thorough research, however due to the horribly low standard of CT research, conspiracy has become a dirty word and it is very hard to be taken seriously when discussing CTs.

This is my question. Why should we accept such horribly low standards in CT research? It does not benefit anyone.

Btw it's a fact that the standards in CT research are low, not my opinion. Zeitgeist is a good example of something that shouldn't even be called research due to it's horribly low standards.

Not once have I defended the standards of research in CT circles. I just pointed out that people will sometimes believe strange things relgardless of logic and that it's a regrettable fact that we just have to respect that.
I'm not arguing that CT research is solid, so in reality there is no argument between us. You seem to think I'm defending poorly researched conspiracies because you have the idea that I'm a "CTer", whatever the hell that is.

You dont have to accept poor quality research in CT's, you just have to accept that those who don't do proper research have as much a right to have their say as anyone. It's up to the individual to make up their own mind, and if some people want to believe lies or half truths thats their business. You really shouldn't worry about it. When something is poorly researched anyone with a shred of intelligence will be able to see that a mile away and ignore it. Those who do follow stupid theries deserve what they get in a way, but no one has any right to defame them simply because they lack the intelligence to spot a BS story when it comes along.

Elevator

"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill -- the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill -- you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

a certain amount of ignorance really is bliss, watched zeitgeist and lots of other vids the past few years and got quite disturbed by the effect they had on me, some of my friends have become so dislusioned by them all they have completl given up on life, don't even draw the dole anymore cos they think they out of the grip ofthe man by doing so!! They are now away with the fairies .com and no talking to them. Sad really but we all have to try sleep at night and not be worried by every little detail.

studiorat

I know a fella who made one of those movies. Went in with an argument and looked for proof to back it up. Convinced himself the world was going to end. Sold up and moved on shortly afterwards.

Truthrevolution

Elevator wrote: »

"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill -- the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill -- you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

a certain amount of ignorance really is bliss, watched zeitgeist and lots of other vids the past few years and got quite disturbed by the effect they had on me, some of my friends have become so dislusioned by them all they have completl given up on life, don't even draw the dole anymore cos they think they out of the grip ofthe man by doing so!! They are now away with the fairies .com and no talking to them. Sad really but we all have to try sleep at night and not be worried by every little detail.

Some of the stuff put into these video's is very OTT.Tell your friends not to be worrying about it, we will only be enslaved if we allow ourselves to be.Any NWO plans will be fought all the way if we collectively take a stand against it.

BumbleB

DeBunny wrote: »

I am trying (and failing) to highlight the low standards in CT research and point out the difference between fact and opinion.

People can believe what they want. The problem I have is when opinions are used as facts or are called research. You've managed to blur the lines between the two yourself.

Time and time again the standards in CT ''research'' fall far below the standards of every other form of research, except perhaps creationist research. They are similar in that both are dogmatic, illogical and quote facts completely out of context or just tell total lies. Both also have an unyielding, dogmatic and fervent following.


Btw it's a fact that the standards in CT research are low, not my opinion. Zeitgeist is a good example of something that shouldn't even be called research due to it's horribly low standards.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe your method of reasoning isn't significantly advanced to process the information being given to you?.

The video is not entitled "illuminati for beginners" .

Most people who are into CT's would actually know a lot about the stuff on the peripheral which is basically the occult and would be able to fill in the gaps themselves.

A lot of debunkers point to wikipedia to find their info ,well a lot of that is garbage, I could edit that to say that I actually was the first man on the moon if you really want to know the truth you have to study ,old books like "the secret teaching of all ages" or write to the author to send you a fully illustrated pop up book with big writing .

Maybe you would prefer to play medal of honour instead.

BumbleB

Truthrevolution wrote: »

Some of the stuff put into these video's is very OTT.Tell your friends not to be worrying about it, we will only be enslaved if we allow ourselves to be.Any NWO plans will be fought all the way if we collectively take a stand against it.

Yep, Maybe after 400 years more enslavement .

studiorat

BumbleB wrote: »

,old books like "the secret teaching of all ages" or write to the author to send you a fully illustrated pop up book with big writing .
.

Great book. Written by a Freemason I might add.

DeBunny

nullzero wrote: »

Not once have I defended the standards of research in CT circles. I just pointed out that people will sometimes believe strange things relgardless of logic and that it's a regrettable fact that we just have to respect that.
I'm not arguing that CT research is solid, so in reality there is no argument between us. You seem to think I'm defending poorly researched conspiracies because you have the idea that I'm a "CTer", whatever the hell that is.

You dont have to accept poor quality research in CT's, you just have to accept that those who don't do proper research have as much a right to have their say as anyone. It's up to the individual to make up their own mind, and if some people want to believe lies or half truths thats their business. You really shouldn't worry about it. When something is poorly researched anyone with a shred of intelligence will be able to see that a mile away and ignore it. Those who do follow stupid theries deserve what they get in a way, but no one has any right to defame them simply because they lack the intelligence to spot a BS story when it comes along.

Uhm.... you did defend CT research.
You seem insistent on telling me I should accept other peoples point of view. Perhaps you should take your own good advice. Yes we do agree on many things. I would be somewhere in the middle when it comes to CT and skepticism, but like I said in my last post I respect peoples right to believe crap but I don't have to respect the crap they believe.
I agree that no one has the right to defame someone else, but if I point out an unintelligent persons lack of intelligence that's hardly defamation, is it?


[QUOTE=BumbleB;64647943

]Did you ever stop to think that maybe your method of reasoning isn't significantly advanced to process the information being given to you?.

No, any way it's not my method of reasoning.

The video is not entitled "illuminati for beginners"

.

No, but it might as well be. It's aimed at ''beginners''

Most people who are into CT's would actually know a lot about the stuff on the peripheral which is basically the occult and would be able to fill in the gaps themselves.

That's the problem. People who have been lied to and misled, filling in the gaps between more lies. Too many people can't tell the difference between speculation and a statement of fact.

A lot of debunkers point to wikipedia to find their info ,well a lot of that is garbage, I could edit that to say that I actually was the first man on the moon if you really want to know the truth you have to study ,old books like "the secret teaching of all ages" or write to the author to send you a fully illustrated pop up book with big writing .

I never mentioned wikipedia, and I wouldn't defend it either, although It's good as a link to alternative sources and most certainly more reliable than zeitgeist.
Heres a good example of a well researched CT book. It uses standard methods of reference and avoids speculation. It's the kind of high standard CT research should be aiming for if it wants to be taken seriously. http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Pearl-Harbor-Disturbing-Administration/dp/1844370674/ref=sr_1_1/280-0096911-8987134?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267138413&sr=1-1
They don't have it in pop up format, but maybe if you asked nicely.

Maybe you would prefer to play medal of honour instead.

Yeah cooool! whats your user name and we can team up! :rolleyes:
You got all righteous when I was rude previously. Still feeling righteous?
The last computer game I played was :pac:

nullzero

De bunny, don't put words in my mouth. I never defended either side. You're out of order. I merely tried to see things from the perspective of someone who might believe the more unsubstantiated CT's, you mistook that for supporting their beliefs, you were drawing conclusions that are/were just not true. For someone who seems so dedicated to sound scientific methods your basing your arguments on your own false interpretations of other people's posts is somewhat ironic.

I never said you should accept the views of others, merely their right to differing opinions to yours even if you don't like those opinions.

I've been very patient with you, even when you were being incredibly rude and arrogant. Please stop misrepresenting my opinions and if it's not too much to ask, could you start to give others posters some basic respect, otherwise you shouldn't expect any in return. Having differing opinions doesn't grant any of us the right to castigate others, that is something I would have thought would be fairly obvious until recently.

DeBunny

In short, there's not really any right or wrong in conspiracy research, insamuch as opinion is the main catalyst behind the formation of idioms within this sphere of research.

CT's are like anything, belief is paramount, opinion however irrational is the driving force even if it makes the believer "wrong".

Opinions are the be all and end all in CT research because so much of the topics are improbable or improvable.

I read these statements as a defense of CT research and how it does not follow the same rules as other spheres of research. In other forms of research there are rights and wrongs, and fact is the driving force behind the research, not opinion.

I tackled that issue because i felt you were out of line,

This does not sound like you had respect for my opinions. In what way was I out of line? (in my initial post). You also directed me to the skeptics forum more than once. I found that quite disrespectful. If skeptics are not welcome here then fact will never be separated from fiction.

I never said you should accept the views of others, merely their right to differing opinions to yours even if you don't like those opinions.

I just pointed out that people will sometimes believe strange things relgardless of logic and that it's a regrettable fact that we just have to respect that.

Like I said, '''I respect peoples right to have strange opinions, I am not obliged, however, to respect the strange opinions.''
I can accept that people believe strange things regardless of logic but I don't think it deserves my respect. If everyone respected each others opinion nothing would ever be debated. Do you think Charles Darwin and Richard Owen respected each others opinion? Not that I'm comparing this hand bags at dawn squabble to those two.

Perhaps we'd be better off here. http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054878335

nullzero

DeBunny wrote: »

I read these statements as a defense of CT research and how it does not follow the same rules as other spheres of research. In other forms of research there are rights and wrongs, and fact is the driving force behind the research, not opinion.



This does not sound like you had respect for my opinions. In what way was I out of line? (in my initial post). You also directed me to the skeptics forum more than once. I found that quite disrespectful. If skeptics are not welcome here then fact will never be separated from fiction.





Like I said, '''I respect peoples right to have strange opinions, I am not obliged, however, to respect the strange opinions.''
I can accept that people believe strange things regardless of logic but I don't think it deserves my respect. If everyone respected each others opinion nothing would ever be debated. Do you think Charles Darwin and Richard Owen respected each others opinion? Not that I'm comparing this hand bags at dawn squabble to those two.

Perhaps we'd be better off here. http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054878335

I'd love to know how those opening quotes were in defence of CT's.
I was merely pointing out the obvious, that isnt defence.
I've been trying to make a point about how regardless of logic etc... people still believe what they want. I'm not saying that I'm right and you're wrong, you turned the discussion in that direction and I've been pointing out how I'm not arguing for or against CT's and the poor research that is done by their proponants.

It is true that you have to respect peoples right to have mad ideas. You can debate all you like, I never once said that isn't acceptable, you were again putting words in my mouth.
Debate is important and should always be encouraged.

Here are my points simplified.

* People should be free to debate whatever the hell they like.

* It's not acceptable to take the piss out of people because you think their opinions are stupid.

Simple enough?;););)