Covid-19 likely to be man made

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Is the scientist who wrote this book a member of a lunatic fringe? I don't know. Do you?
Have you read the book? I haven't.

Consensus sorts it for you.

Are you a virologist? No. Can you distinguish between two virologists with two differing positions? No.

Therefore you go with the consensus of other experts, scientists and virologists on the subject. Why? As a lay-person you aren't in a position to determine otherwise. Is the consensus automatically correct? No, but it's the best information we have, so by definition it's the most correct information until proven otherwise. This is why peer review, etc exists.

And if you are making an argument "but people thought the sun went around the earth", no, prevailing notions and speculation from the dark ages is not a comparison to modern science.

For them to not be in the majority is good enough for you to dismiss them. For me, their numbers is NOT a reason alone to dismiss them. I'm not saying they are right but you are saying emphatically that they are wrong based on how many or how few of them there are.

No I'm not, and if you maintain that then you are misunderstanding the points

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's a very easy thing, and can be quite profitable. Pundits and crank "experts" can make a lot of money and garner a lot of attention from spreading their false beliefs, there is nearly always a willing audience of idiots.

A US architect makes 60k to 80k per year denying that 9/11 was an inside job. Alex Jones makes millions. Anti-vax groups make a fortune in donations. It's a lucrative mini-industry.

Don't pretend to yourself that just because someone says something different, or something that adheres to a particular fringe world view you maintain, that they are some maverick with "special info".

The vast majority of scientists maintain that the current virus was transmitted by animals.

There will always be a minority (for profit or otherwise) who will always go against the grain, whatever the subject, no matter how absurd.

You've missed the point and you're being facetious, DJ.


You maintain that writing a book about something is for profit and hence the book's contents should be shunned.


If that's the case then by your logic no book should be believed. That's akin to a non sequitur.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You maintain that writing a book about something is for profit and hence the book's contents should be shunned.

I didn't maintain that book was written from profit, reread my posts a little more carefully.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Consensus sorts it for you.

Are you a virologist? No. Can you distinguish between two virologists with two differing positions? No.

Therefore you go with the consensus of other experts, scientists and virologists on the subject. Why? As a lay-person you aren't in a position to determine otherwise. Is the consensus automatically correct? No, but it's the best information we have, so by definition it's the most correct information until proven otherwise. This is why peer review, etc exists.

And if you are making an argument "but people thought the sun went around the earth", no, prevailing notions and speculation from the dark ages is not a comparison to modern science.



No I'm not, and if you maintain that then you are misunderstanding the points

Millennia prior to Medieval Times (not even the Middle Ages or the Dark Ages which were earlier) it was proven that the Earth orbited the Sun. The notion that this was untrue was spread by religious zealots, politial hucksters and iconoclasts well into the 17th Century when science was a hell of a lot more modern than it was during the BC druidic times.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's a very easy thing, and can be quite profitable. Pundits and crank "experts" can make a lot of money and garner a lot of attention from spreading their false beliefs, there is nearly always a willing audience of idiots.

A US architect makes 60k to 80k per year denying that 9/11 was an inside job. Alex Jones makes millions. Anti-vax groups make a fortune in donations. It's a lucrative mini-industry.

Don't pretend to yourself that just because someone says something different, or something that adheres to a particular fringe world view you maintain, that they are some maverick with "special info".

The vast majority of scientists maintain that the current virus was transmitted by animals.

There will always be a minority (for profit or otherwise) who will always go against the grain, whatever the subject, no matter how absurd.

You say it's very easy. It wasn't very easy and certainly not very profitable for the likes of Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden to stand alone in the face of ridicule, wouldn't you say?

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Are you suggesting a majority of scientists were paid (!) to develop this virus? that's an actual possibility to you?

Based on what logic/evidence?

Why would it be any more outlandish than the notion that a scientist stands to profit from writing a book stating what he does?


That's an actual possibility for you?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You say it's very easy. It wasn't very easy and certainly not very profitable for the likes of Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden to stand alone in the face of ridicule, wouldn't you say?

This is nothing to do with whistle-blowing or "going against the grain". It's scientific method and logic. If someone's claims have merit, then the evidence, peer review, etc should generally demonstrate that

If however there are the usual red flags, then indeed it should be treated with skepticism until properly demonstrated.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Why would it be any more outlandish than the notion that a scientist stands to profit from writing a book stating what he does?

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

DJ, you're digging your heels in and losing your temper.


It was you or King Mob who stated that a scientist should not be believed for publishing a book the contents of which go against the grain purely because the motive is profit.



All I did was ask that if financial gain was the overriding factor then why would any book be believed. I also stated, or rather, posited the question that while there might be monetary gain to be gleaned from making allegations that this virus was man-made there equally might be monetary gains to be harvested by decamping on the other side of the so called fence.



You are saying NO to one and PROBABLY to the other.


I'm saying YES/NO/MAYBE to both.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

.....

The notion that a majority of the world's virologists and related experts secret were secretly paid to create a virus under the guise it came from natural causes is in the same boat as someone selling a false claim to profit from book sales to you?

And again...the majority doesn't prove or disprove. It is merely, as you mentioned, a consensus.


I'm not refuting the majority OR confirming the minority.


You, however, are refusing to even listen to the minority. I don't know why. Nobody is trying to hypnotise you.



Just listen to opposing views rather than stamping your feet.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It was you or King Mob who stated that a scientist should not be believed for publishing a book the contents of which go against the grain purely because the motive is profit.

Either of us has argued this.

Halenvaneddie

It’s not beyond the realms of possibilities, would it be considered an act of war if it was ever to come out?

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

And again...the majority doesn't prove or disprove. It is merely, as you mentioned, a consensus.

I'm not refuting the majority OR confirming the minority.

You, however, are refusing to even listen to the minority. I don't know why. Nobody is trying to hypnotise you.

Just listen to opposing views rather than stamping your feet.

It does this apply to flat eartherism?
Holocaust denial?

Hoffmans

My take on this is if they can create 14 different vaccines for this virus they surely could have engineered the virus to begin with , sars and mers were trial runs mers was too deadly so it was stopped this seems to be what they want hitting the less able bodied and elderly the most ,
Who are "they'
I dont know but they are there in the backround...

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You, however, are refusing to even listen to the minority. I don't know why. Nobody is trying to hypnotise you.

I don't know who you are referring to in these posts, you seem to keep ascribing positions to me I don't have.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

It does this apply to flat eartherism?
Holocaust denial?

Regarding Holocaust denial I'm pretty sure it happened even though I wasn't there. But I get a little wary when a person is called a Holocaust Denier if they believe it occurred but don't believe all the facts in the narrative. That to me smacks of thoughtcrime.


A person is vilified if they question the numbers.....IF they think the numbers are inaccurate if they think the death toll might be lower than stated. They aren't pilloried if they suggest the numbers might be higher. So you can question the numbers as long as you think more died than officially declared.



As for flat eartherism. I'm not even going to entertain a discussion about something that is physically impossible.


It is POSSIBLE that more than a lone gunman were responsible for the death of Kennedy.


It is NOT POSSIBLE that the Earth is flat.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I don't know who you are referring to in these posts, you seem to keep ascribing positions to me I don't have.

I'm stating that you don't even listen to the minority who go against the consensus that you talk about. That IS a position that you hold.


All you do is call them uninformed morons.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Regarding Holocaust denial I'm pretty sure it happened even though I wasn't there. But I get a little wary when a person is called a Holocaust Denier if they believe it occurred but don't believe all the facts in the narrative. That to me smacks of thoughtcrime.

A person is vilified if they question the numbers.....IF they think the numbers are inaccurate if they think the death toll might be lower than stated. They aren't pilloried if they suggest the numbers might be higher. So you can question the numbers as long as you think more died than officially declared.

Historians debate the number of people killed all the time. Holocaust deniers are completely different in that they attempt to grossly deflate the death figure, and only of Jews killed (never other figures).

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

I'm stating that you don't even listen to the minority who go against the consensus that you talk about. That IS a position that you hold.

All you do is call them uninformed morons.

Well you are stating wrong. And you still clearly don't understand the concept.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Regarding Holocaust denial I'm pretty sure it happened even though I wasn't there. But I get a little wary when a person is called a Holocaust Denier if they believe it occurred but don't believe all the facts in the narrative. That to me smacks of thoughtcrime.

Lol those poor prosecuted holocaust deniers...

ShatterAlan wrote: »

A person is vilified if they question the numbers.....IF they think the numbers are inaccurate if they think the death toll might be lower than stated. They aren't pilloried if they suggest the numbers might be higher. So you can question the numbers as long as you think more died than officially declared.
.

That's not true though. There are plenty of legitimate historians that have in the past argued and showed the number of deaths were lower than previously thought.
The difference is that they show this via historical research and using actual evidence rather than declaring it is all a Jewish lead conspiracy to fake the event.


You are saying that we should listen to the people claiming it's a vast Jewish conspiracy.
That's holocaust denial.

ShatterAlan wrote: »

As for flat eartherism. I'm not even going to entertain a discussion about something that is physically impossible.


It is POSSIBLE that more than a lone gunman were responsible for the death of Kennedy.


It is NOT POSSIBLE that the Earth is flat.

Why not?
Why are you rejecting what the minority are suggesting?
That's very hypocritical of you.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Lol those poor prosecuted holocaust deniers...

That's not true though. There are plenty of legitimate historians that have in the past argued and showed the number of deaths were lower than previously thought.
The difference is that they show this via historical research and using actual evidence rather than declaring it is all a Jewish lead conspiracy to fake the event.


You are saying that we should listen to the people claiming it's a vast Jewish conspiracy.
That's holocaust denial.


Why not?
Why are you rejecting what the minority are suggesting?
That's very hypocritical of you.

No I am NOT. Stop exaggerating and be very careful what you accuse me of.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I didn't maintain that book was written from profit, reread my posts a little more carefully.

You're right. It was another poster.

NSAman

It has often been asserted that anyone who claims other than the “accepted thinking” is a quack.

Yet, many times these quacks have proved to be correct.

We may never actually find the cause of this virus. There is too much political will to hide evidence. There is too much for various organisations who have vested interests to loose if it was found out that this virus was man made.

One thing I can honestly say, I find the original assertion that eating bats caused it, or food from an open market caused this, is ridiculous.

There are too many little clues in the way the Chinese government dealt with this at the beginning, which lead me to personally believe this was an experiment that went wrong.

Do I have proof? No. Will there ever be proof? No!

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Lol those poor prosecuted holocaust deniers...

That's not true though. There are plenty of legitimate historians that have in the past argued and showed the number of deaths were lower than previously thought.
The difference is that they show this via historical research and using actual evidence rather than declaring it is all a Jewish lead conspiracy to fake the event.


You are saying that we should listen to the people claiming it's a vast Jewish conspiracy.
That's holocaust denial.


Why not?
Why are you rejecting what the minority are suggesting?
That's very hypocritical of you.

What do you mean "why not"? It's not possible that the Earth is flat. Are you playing some kind of weird game here?


And why is that hypocritical of me to not believe what the minority are suggesting if what they are suggesting is not possible?

Dohnjoe

NSAman wrote: »

It has often been asserted that anyone who claims other than the “accepted thinking” is a quack.

Yet, many times these quacks have proved to be correct.

That's your opinion, I don't find it to be true at all. This forum for example, how many theories here have turned out to be correct? in my experience close to zero over the past several years and there have been hundreds of claims

That's because most of these theories come from personal beliefs/views rather than the facts. Sourced from "quacks", aka pseudo-"experts" with fringe ideas low on actual evidence, but convincing enough for people with low critical thinking and preset notions.

There is too much political will to hide evidence. There is too much for various organisations who have vested interests to loose if it was found out that this virus was man made.

If the virus was man-made, and the offending country kept it hidden, why would every other nation work toward hiding that? that makes utterly no sense

One thing I can honestly say, I find the original assertion that eating bats caused it, or food from an open market caused this, is ridiculous.

Argument from incredulity. Scientific consensus from virologists and experts around the world contradicts this. The Corona family of viruses originated in mammals and birds
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus

Do I have proof? No. Will there ever be proof? No!

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

NSAman

Dohnjoe wrote: »

That's your opinion, I don't find it to be true at all. This forum for example, how many theories here have turned out to be correct? in my experience close to zero over the past several years and there have been hundreds of claims

That's because most of these theories come from personal beliefs/views rather than the facts. Sourced from "quacks", aka pseudo-"experts" with fringe ideas low on actual evidence, but convincing enough for people with low critical thinking and preset notions.



If the virus was man-made, and the offending country kept it hidden, why would every other nation work toward hiding that? that makes utterly no sense



Argument from incredulity. Scientific consensus from virologists and experts around the world contradicts this. The Corona family of viruses originated in mammals and birds
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus



What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

So in other words you can’t prove it either was or wasn’t.

Dohnjoe

NSAman wrote: »

So in other words you can’t prove it either was or wasn’t.

It's not about proof. It's about weight of evidence. Currently, the experts, looking at all the evidence we have available have reached a consensus that it's natural.

Do you know more than them? No, so your personal opinions as a lay-person are irrelevant (sorry but it's true). Is there a possibility that it's man-made and escaped a lab somewhere? Yes, but they are taking that possibility into account, and the consensus (majority) looking at all the thousands of factors and complexities have determined that it's highly likely the disease jumped from animals to humans.

NSAman

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's not about proof. It's about weight of evidence. Currently, the experts, looking at all the evidence we have available have reached a consensus that it's natural.

Do you know more than them? No, so your personal opinions as a lay-person are irrelevant (sorry but it's true). Is there a possibility that it's man-made and escaped a lab somewhere? Yes, but they are taking that possibility into account, and the consensus (majority) looking at all the thousands of factors and complexities have determined that it's highly likely the disease jumped from animals to humans.

As the old adage says, experts differ and people die.

How true.....

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

No I am NOT. Stop exaggerating and be very careful what you accuse me of.

Why should we ignore those people then? They have plenty of evidence that it's a vast Jewish conspiracy
They have tons of experts on their side.

And you just dismiss them out of hand because as they would say "you're just brainwashed by the Jewish controlled media".

ShatterAlan wrote: »

What do you mean "why not"? It's not possible that the Earth is flat. Are you playing some kind of weird game here?

How do you know it's not possible?

It's not possible that the buildings in 9/11 were destroyed by controlled demolitions, yet you believe that.

Is it impossible that there's a Jewish lead conspiracy to inflate the numbers in the Holocaust?

ShatterAlan

ShatterAlan wrote: »

What do you mean "why not"? It's not possible that the Earth is flat. Are you playing some kind of weird game here?


And why is that hypocritical of me to not believe what the minority are suggesting if what they are suggesting is not possible?

You're wasting your time with these two. Round and round and round is all you'll go. Half the reason this forum is so inactive.

Dohnjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

You're wasting your time with these two. Round and round and round is all you'll go. Half the reason this forum is so inactive.

People with illogical positions have difficulty dealing with logical questions. That's the only reason why stuff like this goes round and round on conspiracy forums.

Dohnjoe

Dohnjoe wrote: »

People with illogical positions have difficulty dealing with logical questions. That's the only reason why stuff like this goes round and round on conspiracy forums.

Put it this way, if I'm ever looking to cover-up some conspiracies, I'll be sure to hire the both of you to keep watch over this forum.

That is, unless somebody else has already beat me to it :pac:

Just playin'; hope you're well, Dohnjoe!

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

You're wasting your time with these two. Round and round and round is all you'll go. Half the reason this forum is so inactive.

You guys are so sensitive to basic questions.

If people didn't spend so much time avoiding, dancing around and complaining about them and just answered them directly and dishonestly...

NaFirinne

Is this what's next on the agenda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSuCuoQxI20

Timberrrrrrrr

NaFirinne wrote: »

Is this what's next on the agenda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSuCuoQxI20

I didnt watch the clip but I'm gonna say no.

NaFirinne

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I didnt watch the clip but I'm gonna say no.

Like an ostrich with there head stuck in the sand.

Dohnjoe

NaFirinne wrote: »

Like an ostrich with there head stuck in the sand.

What's going to happen next, in your words, a straightforward timeline

e.g. in 3 months X, in 6 months Y and so on.

Timberrrrrrrr

NaFirinne wrote: »

Like an ostrich with there head stuck in the sand.

Their

sydthebeat

NaFirinne wrote: »

Like an ostrich with there head stuck in the sand.

Like all conspiracy theories, your starting point is a fallacy.

Ostriches don't stick their head in the sand

NaFirinne

sydthebeat wrote: »

Like all conspiracy theories, your starting point is a fallacy.

Ostriches don't stick their head in the sand

LOL it's a saying.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Why should we ignore those people then? They have plenty of evidence that it's a vast Jewish conspiracy
They have tons of experts on their side.

And you just dismiss them out of hand because as they would say "you're just brainwashed by the Jewish controlled media".

How do you know it's not possible?

It's not possible that the buildings in 9/11 were destroyed by controlled demolitions, yet you believe that.

Is it impossible that there's a Jewish lead conspiracy to inflate the numbers in the Holocaust?

Firstly, you accused me of insisting that we should consider that those who deem the Holocaust to be a Jewish conspiracy be worthy of attentoin. On top of that you siad such a stance is that, i.e. ME, of a Holocaust Denier.


Secondly, you bring up buildings being deliberately demolished and insist that this is my assertion.




I have said neither. Do you wish to make any more fallacious accusations?

Xtrail14

Tiny penis ^

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

You guys are so sensitive to basic questions.

If people didn't spend so much time avoiding, dancing around and complaining about them and just answered them directly and dishonestly...

Your stance is that you believe something. When someone doesn't believe what you believe you either


A. Demand an alternative explanation.


2. Call them a tinfoiler.


D. Accuse them of some manifestation labelled "incredulity"

ShatterAlan

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Their

Could you not correct the collective, as well?


id est, ostriches have more than one head.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Firstly, you accused me of insisting that we should consider that those who deem the Holocaust to be a Jewish conspiracy be worthy of attentoin. On top of that you siad such a stance is that, i.e. ME, of a Holocaust Denier.


Secondly, you bring up buildings being deliberately demolished and insist that this is my assertion.




I have said neither. Do you wish to make any more fallacious accusations?

Lol you're moaning about false statemenys, yet you are falsely accusing me of stuff here.

Why shouldn't we listen to Holocaust deniers?
I asked you this because I thought it was obviously something that we shouldn't consider seriously. Yet your argument is that we should always listen to the minority. I asked you to explain the difference. You dodged this question as per usual.
I wasn't accusing you of being a Holocaust deniers, I was pointing out that your argument has a flaw because it can also be used to defend Holocaust denial.

You seem very sensitive and easily triggered by this sort of thing. You should grow thicker skin, because if you are going to be promoting silly conspiracy theories you'll have to comfortable sharing your bed with Holocaust denial.
There's a lot of overlap between anti semetism and conspiracy theories.

And again I'm sorry for offending you by suggesting you might believe in the most common belief in conspiracy circles. Perhaps if you directly answered questions instead of dodging you could avoid such offense in the future.

Since you don't believe in the explosive demolition, which other theory do you subscribe to?
Should we reject out of hand the conspiracy theorists who suggest explosives?

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Lol you're moaning about false statemenys, yet you are falsely accusing me of stuff here.

Why shouldn't we listen to Holocaust deniers?
I asked you this because I thought it was obviously something that we shouldn't consider seriously. Yet your argument is that we should always listen to the minority. I asked you to explain the difference. You dodged this question as per usual.
I wasn't accusing you of being a Holocaust deniers, I was pointing out that your argument has a flaw because it can also be used to defend Holocaust denial.

You seem very sensitive and easily triggered by this sort of thing. You should grow thicker skin, because if you are going to be promoting silly conspiracy theories you'll have to comfortable sharing your bed with Holocaust denial.
There's a lot of overlap between anti semetism and conspiracy theories.

And again I'm sorry for offending you by suggesting you might believe in the most common belief in conspiracy circles. Perhaps if you directly answered questions instead of dodging you could avoid such offense in the future.

Since you don't believe in the explosive demolition, which other theory do you subscribe to?
Should we reject out of hand the conspiracy theorists who suggest explosives?

I am baffled as to why ou would think I am in the slightest bit upset by what you have written. I'm letting you know that your accusations and conclusions are bereft of rationale.


Yes, I said that the minority consensus should always be heard. I did not say that it should be believed.



The minority now in this part of the world still believe in the supernatural, i.e gods, afterlife and physically impossible "miracles". I'm not advocating that they be silenced much the same way that they silenced, and even killed, dissenters, when they comprised the majority..



And I didn't dodge any question. I merely refused to answer a question, tabled by you, that I felt was irrelevant.


You mention explosives.....I have no idea where you think that I mentioned such.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

I am baffled as to why ou would think I am in the slightest bit upset by what you have written. I'm letting you know that your accusations and conclusions are bereft of rationale.

Which conclusions?

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Yes, I said that the minority consensus should always be heard. I did not say that it should be believed.

So then we should listen to Holocaust deniers and flat earthers?

ShatterAlan wrote: »

And I didn't dodge any question. I merely refused to answer a question, tabled by you, that I felt was irrelevant.

Yea... Unless you've actually explained how it's irrelevant, that's ignoring questiins.

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You mention explosives.....I have no idea where you think that I mentioned such.

I never said you did.
But it's the most common belief expressed by conspiracy theorists who believe in 9/11 conspiracies.

I think such a thing is as ridiculous as flat earth and shouldn't be seriously considered.
Do you believe in this version of the conspiracy given that you believe there is a conspiracy around 9/11.
Rather than false accuse me of attributing beliefs to you and moaning about it, perhaps you should stop avoiding points and just state your position clearly.

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

Which conclusions?

So then we should listen to Holocaust deniers and flat earthers?


Yea... Unless you've actually explained how it's irrelevant, that's ignoring questiins.

I never said you did.
But it's the most common belief expressed by conspiracy theorists who believe in 9/11 conspiracies.

I think such a thing is as ridiculous as flat earth and shouldn't be seriously considered.
Do you believe in this version of the conspiracy given that you believe there is a conspiracy around 9/11.
Rather than false accuse me of attributing beliefs to you and moaning about it, perhaps you should stop avoiding points and just state your position clearly.

Why are you bringing up explosives/explosions?


You already tried to link me to Holocaust denial.


Now you are trying to connect me with the notion of building explosions.


Why is that?

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Why are you bringing up explosives/explosions?

You already tried to link me to Holocaust denial.

Now you are trying to connect me with the notion of building explosions.

Why is that?

But I've done neither of these things. You've just taken offense yo the notion for some reason.

I bring up Holocaust denial because it's obviously something that most rational people agree is vile nonsense. I assume this also includes yourself and I have stated this is my assumption.
Now your argument is that we should "listen to the minority". Holocaust deniers are a minority. So by your logic we should listen to their claims with at least as much attention as real historians.
This is obviously a problem with your logic as I see it.

You like most rational people reject Holocaust denial and agree they shouldn't be taken seriously.

So why do you exclude Holocaust deniers from the idea of "always listen to the minority"?
It's a pretty simple question. Not sure why you're getting so huffy about it.

I bring up the notion of explosives for 9/11 to make a comparison. This is a common belief amount conspiracy theorists.

You say that we can reject and ignore flat earthers believe what they believe is impossible to you.
I find the idea of explosive demolition in 9/11 equally as impossible as the notion of flat earth. (and so do you based on how upset you are about being accused of believing it.)
So again your logic seems to say that we should ignore 9/11 conspiracy theorists because they propose something impossible.
But you also state that we should listen to them.

So why should we listen to them according to you?

ShatterAlan

King Mob wrote: »

But I've done neither of these things. You've just taken offense yo the notion for some reason.

I bring up Holocaust denial because it's obviously something that most rational people agree is vile nonsense. I assume this also includes yourself and I have stated this is my assumption.
Now your argument is that we should "listen to the minority". Holocaust deniers are a minority. So by your logic we should listen to their claims with at least as much attention as real historians.
This is obviously a problem with your logic as I see it.

You like most rational people reject Holocaust denial and agree they shouldn't be taken seriously.

So why do you exclude Holocaust deniers from the idea of "always listen to the minority"?
It's a pretty simple question. Not sure why you're getting so huffy about it.

I bring up the notion of explosives for 9/11 to make a comparison. This is a common belief amount conspiracy theorists.

You say that we can reject and ignore flat earthers believe what they believe is impossible to you.
I find the idea of explosive demolition in 9/11 equally as impossible as the notion of flat earth. (and so do you based on how upset you are about being accused of believing it.)
So again your logic seems to say that we should ignore 9/11 conspiracy theorists because they propose something impossible.
But you also state that we should listen to them.

So why should we listen to them according to you?

You've never brought up explosions in buildings or Holocaust?


Now I think that you're just trolling, playing games or have lost the plot.


Go and harass someone else I say. I'm trying to have a serious discussion here, not be badgered by someone on a wind-up.