ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 31st May 2018, 11:52 AM   #121
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Do I? Really? Where do you draw the line? An essay? A book? A series of books with additional evidentiary volumes?

The thing is. If someone reads an article that is claiming to refute this and that, this same ”someone” has to understand it in order to see if that is really the case. IF this someone understands the paper, he/she should have no problems in explaining the critical data, methods and conclusions and make his/her case.
And yet you do this all the time, or worse, post a Youtube video.

Quote:
That is how it works. It is not the opponent who shall do this for him/her. That is plain nuts.
This is why you fail, we're not you're opponents. You've come here to make a claim, and it is you who have to provide evidence for the claim.

Quote:
Example. There is an argument I make for CIA sanctioning the assassinations of the Ngo brothers against the expressed orders of their president, JFK.

If you in turn have issues with any of my statements, you correct them and/or request that I substantiate them with sources and maybe quotes from these if deemed proper.
I posted the links, none of the document s were more than three pages long, and all were brief.

Quote:
Imagine me posting a couple of links to x number of books and suggests that you should read them and ”understand”.

Would you like that?
Depends on the books.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 12:00 PM   #122
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,388
RFK junior is just following in the footsteps of the Martin Luther King family,who has been pushing crackpot conspiracy theories about the murder of MLK for years....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 12:09 PM   #123
No Other
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 254
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
RFK junior is just following in the footsteps of the Martin Luther King family,who has been pushing crackpot conspiracy theories about the murder of MLK for years....
What "crackpot" conspiracy theories is RFKjr putting out there?
No Other is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 12:28 PM   #124
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,236
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
How is this different from what we have today? GW Bush had a Cabinet which had collective assets exceeding $500M.
Yep that agrees with what I was trying to explain to manifesto. He is complaining about money in politics but money has been in politics since the git go. I believe all the signers of the Constitution would have been considered wealthy or powerful men in their own time frame. I cannot speak to who was in President Washington's cabinet but I suspect they would be wealthy or powerful men of their time also.

His cabinet consisted of John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, Henry Knox and Edmund Randolph with John Adams as VP.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 12:50 PM   #125
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,724
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
The evidence of a conspiracy and a cover up of the assassination of RFK are if at all possible, even more obvious than the same for his older brother. It’ll take time to go through all of it but be sure that I will, if not banned.
If you get banned, it won't be because of what you believe, but because of the way you may express the belief, contrary to an MA that works as much for you as it could against you. Calling people "ignorant" when they don't agree with you is the way to ensure the latter, not the former.
Quote:
Of course there is more than one side to every story but that doesn’t mean that truth is relative. There is only one way an event can have happened, not several ways (with reservations for multiple universes).
Can't disagree with that, really; but this is a case of historical debate where people every bit as intelligent as you have, with the same set of facts, come to a conclusion different from yours. It happens all the time- there are still debates about whether King Richard III killed (or had killed) his nephews in the Tower. Same set of facts, and only one way it could actually have happened, yet Alison Weir differs from Paul Murray Kendall as to the truth of the matter. Neither opinion determines, or is meant to determine, the truth, so "truth isn't relative" is effectively irrelevant here- that's a debating trick, really a red herring.

Quote:
When time and again have to deal with ”skeptics” on a forum devoted to ”scientific skepticism” that acts contrary to every reasonable definition of that concept, one has to point it out.

To remain sane.
Do you understand that you just reinforced my point about "no true skeptic" here? I'll also add that if your sanity is so fragile that it can't take a little disagreement without descending to insult, this might not be the best place for you to present your ideas.

Quote:
Do I? Really? Where do you draw the line? An essay? A book? A series of books with additional evidentiary volumes?

The thing is. If someone reads an article that is claiming to refute this and that, this same ”someone” has to understand it in order to see if that is really the case. IF this someone understands the paper, he/she should have no problems in explaining the critical data, methods and conclusions and make his/her case.

That is how it works. It is not the opponent who shall do this for him/her. That is plain nuts.

Example. There is an argument I make for CIA sanctioning the assassinations of the Ngo brothers against the expressed orders of their president, JFK.

If you in turn have issues with any of my statements, you correct them and/or request that I substantiate them with sources and maybe quotes from these if deemed proper.

Imagine me posting a couple of links to x number of books and suggests that you should read them and ”understand”.

Would you like that?
I'm talking about a finite entirety of evidence here, not some vague body of it that people will keep adding "evidentiary volumes" to in order to prolong the argument. There's only so much of it- and, yes, I think that, if something's presented that you're not already familiar with as a response to something you bring up, then it's incumbent on you to read the material in its entirety. You're the only one who can know what in it you would find relevant, nobody else can determine that for you- you're essentially asking folks to cherry-pick the material for you without knowing which bits you'd rather not consider.


I'll admit I'm not as familiar with the RFK assassination as you are- I've read a couple of books, but I don't consider myself familiar enough with the subject to have a definite opinion on it. As far as JFK's, it might surprise you to know that I was once a pretty committed believer in a conspiracy, that Oswald was innocent. What turned me away from that was, ironically, reading David Lifton's Best Evidence, not so much the ridiculous body-snatching theory itself as the way it became obvious to me he'd arrived at it- by simply ignoring the consilient body of evidence, cherry-picking his way to a conclusion that had no regard at all for anything that might contradict his scenario. I didn't, at the time (my early 20's) know the name of the concept, but it was clear enough from its absence in his thinking.

Quote:
When debating a controversial subject the discussion tends to be polarized.

A is listing all the facts, sources and good arguments for or against.

B is listing all the facts, sources and good arguments against or for.

May the closest to the Truth win.
Well, carry on then, I'll leave you to it. I'll just ask you to consider the idea that you can't bully and insult your way to the truth- telling your "opponents" (if you must have it so) that they're either complicit or ignorant is no way to discuss something you clearly consider important enough to need people to see your "Truth."
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 02:09 PM   #126
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Yep that agrees with what I was trying to explain to manifesto. He is complaining about money in politics but money has been in politics since the git go. I believe all the signers of the Constitution would have been considered wealthy or powerful men in their own time frame. I cannot speak to who was in President Washington's cabinet but I suspect they would be wealthy or powerful men of their time also.

His cabinet consisted of John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, Henry Knox and Edmund Randolph with John Adams as VP.
It is the amount of money and how big money can bye legislation at the expence of the voters and taxpayers.

Legalized corruption.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 02:14 PM   #127
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by No Other View Post
What "crackpot" conspiracy theories is RFKjr putting out there?
He's an Anti-Vaccination guy:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...cine-science1/

That's more than enough.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 02:55 PM   #128
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
If you get banned, it won't be because of what you believe, but because of the way you may express the belief, contrary to an MA that works as much for you as it could against you. Calling people "ignorant" when they don't agree with you is the way to ensure the latter, not the former.
I’m not debating in vacuum and I’m no robot. For every insult I give there is 20 more coming my way.

Quote:
Can't disagree with that, really; but this is a case of historical debate where people every bit as intelligent as you have, with the same set of facts, come to a conclusion different from yours. It happens all the time- there are still debates about whether King Richard III killed (or had killed) his nephews in the Tower. Same set of facts, and only one way it could actually have happened, yet Alison Weir differs from Paul Murray Kendall as to the truth of the matter. Neither opinion determines, or is meant to determine, the truth, so "truth isn't relative" is effectively irrelevant here- that's a debating trick, really a red herring.
Returning to the issue of the assassinations of Ngo brothers, I have the opinion that the CIA (and among others, Lodge) were fully aware, if not ordering it, that they were about to get killed and that they did nothing to stop it.

And, most important, that they acted against the explicit orders from JFK.

If you disagree, feel free to counter with information speaking against my contention.

(There is more)

Quote:
Do you understand that you just reinforced my point about "no true skeptic" here? I'll also add that if your sanity is so fragile that it can't take a little disagreement without descending to insult, this might not be the best place for you to present your ideas.
If it is obvious that x knowingly obstruct, harass, stalk, lie, etc, and at the same time pretend to be a ”skeptic” I will call him/her out.

Shouldn’t I?

Quote:
I'm talking about a finite entirety of evidence here, not some vague body of it that people will keep adding "evidentiary volumes" to in order to prolong the argument. There's only so much of it- and, yes, I think that, if something's presented that you're not already familiar with as a response to something you bring up, then it's incumbent on you to read the material in its entirety. You're the only one who can know what in it you would find relevant, nobody else can determine that for you- you're essentially asking folks to cherry-pick the material for you without knowing which bits you'd rather not consider.
I do not agree. If the article in qustion contains proof/evidence/a good argument for this and that, it is the person refering to it who should explain why this is the case.

Maybe if an argument is so complex that I must have a deeper look at the actual science in the context of the paper, I’ll do so, but not before my opponent at least try to convey its findings and show that he/she have grasped the essence of it.

An example. The HSCA acoustic evidence have been attacked from day one and continued to be attacked up to this very day. I have read most of it, and nothing of it stand up to scrutiny.

Still, I need to know why the opponent who invoke one or more of these ”debunkings” find it/them true. I can’t do that for them. They have to explain with specific reference to it in order for me to respond in a comprehensive manner. I surely can’t guess what the opponent find so convincing, could I?

Quote:
I'll admit I'm not as familiar with the RFK assassination as you are- I've read a couple of books,
Compared to the JFK assassination there are not that many. 10-15 books worth reading. Same with all other media and formats. Roughly 10 times less material (worth reading/look at).

Quote:
but I don't consider myself familiar enough with the subject to have a definite opinion on it.
May I ask which books it is that you have read? Feel free to answer or not. Not important.

Quote:
As far as JFK's, it might surprise you to know that I was once a pretty committed believer in a conspiracy, that Oswald was innocent. What turned me away from that was, ironically, reading David Lifton's Best Evidence, not so much the ridiculous body-snatching theory itself as the way it became obvious to me he'd arrived at it- by simply ignoring the consilient body of evidence, cherry-picking his way to a conclusion that had no regard at all for anything that might contradict his scenario. I didn't, at the time (my early 20's) know the name of the concept, but it was clear enough from its absence in his thinking.
Luckily I read a lot of critique of Lifton and his ”Best Evidence” before reading the book which probably have spared me some embarrasment in discussions on different forums. Yes, he is not good at reflecting on his ’findings’ and even worse at interviewing witnesses and make estimates of accuracy versus time, etc.

He did one good thing, though. He opened up the at the time unthinkable possibilty that maybe there is reason to not take the medical evidence at face value.

That said, I’m not sure if one bad apple is enough to discard the whole basket. For me the road have been the contrary. The book that turned me around from mainstream ’skepticism’ was this one: https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakab...why+it+matters

Especially the part on ”why it matters”.

Quote:
Well, carry on then, I'll leave you to it. I'll just ask you to consider the idea that you can't bully and insult your way to the truth- telling your "opponents" (if you must have it so) that they're either complicit or ignorant is no way to discuss something you clearly consider important enough to need people to see your "Truth."
I can say this, if most of the other ’guests’ in this forum had behaved like you have, I would be much more reasonable, that I can garantee.

Thanks for this.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 04:36 PM   #129
Major Major
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 265
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Is there a thread on this topic? If so, I’ll post the proof in due time. Of course they knew that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor that very day. They had broken the Japanese codes long before that happened.

Like reading from an open book. Prime time.
Well, there's this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=325634

And this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=302892

And this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=286164

And this:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=244726

Major Major is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 04:43 PM   #130
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,388
Now the Pearl Harbor crap.
Manifesto apparently never met a conspiracy theory he did not buy into...
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 05:42 PM   #131
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Now the Pearl Harbor crap.
Manifesto apparently never met a conspiracy theory he did not buy into...
You seem to be more concerned about theories of conspiracies than conspiracies. Correct?

Quote:
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
Ever heard of pacifism that accepts the concept of self defence?
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 05:43 PM   #132
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
Thank you. I have a look at it when time admits.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 04:41 AM   #133
Major Major
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 265
Oh, look! Manifesto has someone who agrees with him!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ennedy-it.html

Major Major is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 05:00 AM   #134
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,196
Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
Oh, look! Manifesto has someone who agrees with him!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ennedy-it.html


Really?

Oh, wait... its the Daily Flail.

False alarm.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 05:20 AM   #135
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Really?

Oh, wait... its the Daily Flail.

False alarm.
Brad Johnson worked for CNN when discovering the tape recording which contains proof of two pistols being fired in the pentry where RFK got assassinated.

That said, US MSM is the monolithic propaganda organ for the US Security State so I would be very careful with information coming from any of its present or former presstitutes.

Double and tripple check everything.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 06:53 AM   #136
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Another child of RFK supporting a new investigation of the assassination of her father.
Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, told the Globe this week that she supports a new investigation, joining her brother Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who revealed last weekend that he visited convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan in prison and believes someone else killed RFK.
Boston Globe: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...n6N/story.html

Hope.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 07:27 AM   #137
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,236
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post

Hope.
Er why would this be hope? In your vision of the world the evil National security state controls everything. How will a new investigation actually work then?

Wouldn't any new evidence be destroyed?

Wouldn't any new witness be killed?

Have you thought this through?

Why would the super efficient and evil NSS suddenly throw up it hands and be nice now?

By the way who is the leader of the NSS?
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 02:39 PM   #138
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,196
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Brad Johnson worked for CNN when discovering the tape recording which contains proof of two pistols being fired in the pentry where RFK got assassinated.

That said, US MSM is the monolithic propaganda organ for the US Security State so I would be very careful with information coming from any of its present or former presstitutes.

Double and tripple check everything.

Its the Daily Flail.... false alarm.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 09:35 PM   #139
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Er why would this be hope? In your vision of the world the evil National security state controls everything. How will a new investigation actually work then?

Wouldn't any new evidence be destroyed?

Wouldn't any new witness be killed?

Have you thought this through?

Why would the super efficient and evil NSS suddenly throw up it hands and be nice now?

By the way who is the leader of the NSS?
Hope.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2018, 09:37 PM   #140
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Its the Daily Flail.... false alarm.
Have you double and tripple checked it?
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 07:45 AM   #141
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Have you double and tripple checked it?

Checked what? Explain, please.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 08:59 AM   #142
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,236
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Hope.
So in other words you concede you don't have a clue about any of this.

....and we kinda guess that already.

So since you are just pretending to know about the NSS and just making up stuff why should we talk to you?
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 09:50 AM   #143
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
So in other words you concede you don't have a clue about any of this.

....and we kinda guess that already.

So since you are just pretending to know about the NSS and just making up stuff why should we talk to you?
Hope.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 09:51 AM   #144
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Checked what? Explain, please.
The information in the article he is handwaving away.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 10:54 AM   #145
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
The information in the article he is handwaving away.
What information? What specifics? Is he doing the same behavior as you when you are hand waving scientific information that refutes your Theories?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 03:02 PM   #146
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,196
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Have you double and tripple checked it?
I don't, by default, believe anything that is published in the Daily Flail.... its a gutter rag with questionable editorial and reporting practices. ("UFO Lands in Hyde Park" is a classic example).

What I do is copy a substantial piece of the text from a story, and Google search to see if the same exact story has been put out on the AP wire or published in another, more reputable source (e.g. WAPO, WSJ, NYT, Politico), one that fact checks before going to press (a legacy term).

If I find the exact same story on one of those more reputable sources, I am more inclined to believe the story. If not, I dismiss it.

At the time I posted, there was no other paper carrying this story "as writ" so I dismissed it as conspiraloon bollocks.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.

Last edited by smartcooky; 2nd June 2018 at 03:05 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 04:14 PM   #147
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I don't, by default, believe anything that is published in the Daily Flail.... its a gutter rag with questionable editorial and reporting practices. ("UFO Lands in Hyde Park" is a classic example).

What I do is copy a substantial piece of the text from a story, and Google search to see if the same exact story has been put out on the AP wire or published in another, more reputable source (e.g. WAPO, WSJ, NYT, Politico), one that fact checks before going to press (a legacy term).

If I find the exact same story on one of those more reputable sources, I am more inclined to believe the story. If not, I dismiss it.

At the time I posted, there was no other paper carrying this story "as writ" so I dismissed it as conspiraloon bollocks.
The fact that RFKjr want the murder of his father reinvestigated is a theory of a conspiracy?

Is this a lone nutty position?
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 04:14 PM   #148
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I don't, by default, believe anything that is published in the Daily Flail.... its a gutter rag with questionable editorial and reporting practices. ("UFO Lands in Hyde Park" is a classic example).

What I do is copy a substantial piece of the text from a story, and Google search to see if the same exact story has been put out on the AP wire or published in another, more reputable source (e.g. WAPO, WSJ, NYT, Politico), one that fact checks before going to press (a legacy term).

If I find the exact same story on one of those more reputable sources, I am more inclined to believe the story. If not, I dismiss it.

At the time I posted, there was no other paper carrying this story "as writ" so I dismissed it as conspiraloon bollocks.
He neglected the headline: "Kennedy Children Divided...", which tells the rest of the story.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 04:21 PM   #149
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
He neglected the headline: "Kennedy Children Divided...", which tells the rest of the story.
You are as usual off base by a mile or two. No, this is another article in the Daily mail about the fact that RFKjr wants the assassination of his father reinvestigated. The article you are referring to is in The Boston Globe reporting that his sister wants the same. A reinvestigation of the assassination of her father, RFK.

But I like the slant in the BG article. ”Kennedy Children Divided”, not the real news, ”Kennedy Children Wants the Truth”.

It is called, spin.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 04:24 PM   #150
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
What information? What specifics? Is he doing the same behavior as you when you are hand waving scientific information that refutes your Theories?
Do I? Cite. Explain. Argue.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 05:38 PM   #151
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
You are as usual off base by a mile or two. No, this is another article in the Daily mail about the fact that RFKjr wants the assassination of his father reinvestigated. The article you are referring to is in The Boston Globe reporting that his sister wants the same. A reinvestigation of the assassination of her father, RFK.

But I like the slant in the BG article. ”Kennedy Children Divided”, not the real news, ”Kennedy Children Wants the Truth”.

It is called, spin.
Strange because the Boston Globe has been Kennedy-friendly since day one.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 07:22 PM   #152
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,224
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Do I? Cite. Explain. Argue.
Baloney.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2018, 08:04 PM   #153
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,236
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Do I? Cite. Explain. Argue.
Baloney x 2
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 02:05 AM   #154
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,026
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
You are as usual off base by a mile or two. No, this is another article in the Daily mail about the fact that RFKjr wants the assassination of his father reinvestigated. The article you are referring to is in The Boston Globe reporting that his sister wants the same. A reinvestigation of the assassination of her father, RFK.

But I like the slant in the BG article. ”Kennedy Children Divided”, not the real news, ”Kennedy Children Wants the Truth”.

It is called, spin.
Oh, the irony. You cite the Daily Fail article as 'the real news'. Really?

Who wrote that article, Manifesto? Tim Tate and Brad Johnson.

Who wrote the book that the article is about? Oh, look! By an astonishing coincidence, it's Tim Tate and Brad Johnson.

That article is not journalism: it's advertising. Do you honestly expect the two authors of the book to give an unbiased critique of their work?
Which of those two papers is more likely to put a spin on the story?

Next time, old chap, check your sources. In fact, it's probably best to double, or even 'tripple' (sic) check them. Always good to be accurate, don't you think?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 02:34 AM   #155
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,771
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Oh, the irony. You cite the Daily Fail article as 'the real news'. Really?

Who wrote that article, Manifesto? Tim Tate and Brad Johnson.
...........

It's not an article or a review. It's an excerpt from their book itself, as the credit plainly states:
Quote:
Adapted by Corinna Honan from The Assassination Of Robert F. Kennedy by Tim Tate and Brad Johnson, to be published by Thistle on June 6 at £11.99. © Tim Tate and Brad Johnson 2018.

Last edited by Bob001; 3rd June 2018 at 02:35 AM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 04:07 AM   #156
bknight
Muse
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by manifesto View Post
Do I? Cite. Explain. Argue.
I asked what information and/or what specifics. I didn't add you second most favorite line Cite. Explain. Argue. But I will now. You ask of those debating arguing with you, that which you refuse to do.
Hans was more succinct, baloney.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 08:33 AM   #157
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Baloney x 2
Agree.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 08:34 AM   #158
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
I asked what information and/or what specifics. I didn't add you second most favorite line Cite. Explain. Argue. But I will now. You ask of those debating arguing with you, that which you refuse to do.
Hans was more succinct, baloney.
What do I ”refuse”? Cite. Explain. Argue.

You know the drill.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 08:39 AM   #159
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Oh, the irony. You cite the Daily Fail article as 'the real news'. Really?
No. I cite the headline of the Boston Globe article, and call it spin of the real news that is the fact that two of RFK’s children wants a new investigation of the assassination of their father.

So, where do we find the ”oh the irony” now?
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2018, 08:53 AM   #160
manifesto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It's not an article or a review. It's an excerpt from their book itself, as the credit plainly states:
It was not me who posted the link to the Daily Mail article, and the news that RFKjr wants a new investigation did I not get from there. I already knew this.

I posted a link to a Boston Globe article cointaining the news that also a daughter of RFK, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, wants a new investigation. That was ”real news” to me.

Noting that the headline says - ”RFK’s children divided over calls for a fresh investigation of his assassination” - I conclude that it is spin on the real news which is that two of RFK’s children wants a new investigation of the assassination of their father.

Do you disagree on any particular issue here or are you just whining about as usual?

Be specific.
__________________
"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society" - John F. Kennedy
manifesto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.