Second_in_pie
Senior Member
You're either incredibly thick or trolling your ass off. You assume that your evidence is so amazingly proving of your argument that it's impossible for someone looking at it "with an open mind" to deny the truth of your statement. In reality, when someone actually analyzes it, it's full of so many holes, gigantic logical leaps, and assumptions with no basis other than to continue the argument to a conclusion that there are countless conspiracies everywhere. But as soon as someone discredits your information and points out all of the problems in your logic, apparently the only way for us to be thinking properly is to be taking your exact opinion. Since you may not be able to realize it, there's absolutely no logic in that argument.I can tell you focus on things that help you convince yourself that there's no way it was a conspiracy, you haven't looked much at the other side and especially not with an open mind. You've been conditioned and are probably too far gone from what I can see.. sorry.
A very large portion of these conspiracy ideas are a combination of very unlikely events and flying leaps of logic in ungrounded assumptions. Occam's razor might be wrong in very certain situations, but dozens of totally unlikely events as well as assumptions up the ass make an act screamingly unlikely. Mostly, it's grounded on the assumption that people would be willing to do anything in power, and that humans are all naturally evil and completely amoral. There might be some figures that are completely psychopathic, but when conspiracies involve dozens if not hundreds of players all being "in on the conspiracy," it's just impossible to credit. The only explanation is that you and other people believing in conspiracy theories are under the belief that anyone is willing to do anything in search of power (and the benefits of some conspiracies to certain people continue to be unfounded.) The fact is that it's been scientifically proven that this fact is false. I'd like you to tell me why, psychologically, George Bush or some head of the CIA would want to sacrifice thousands of american lives, along with dozens if not hundreds of bureaucratically managed underdogs. Tell me how they rationalize it, and what exactly the benefits to all of these people?