Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you prefer the "simple" conspiracy, rather than the complex (extreme) types? The simple ones are more believable in your opinion?
my knee-jerk reaction was to answer "no" but......
one thing i've noticed from following birtherism is that every time you're able to debunk a birther belief they come back with a more complex hypothesis ( minus actual evidence ) on how it "could have happened". the more debunking that goes on, the more complex the theory gets.
so, yes, i am less likely to believe a conspiracy theory void of facts the more complex that it gets.
i'm no cheerleader for the government. i was born in 1967 so my earliest memories of a US president was the fallout from watergate. i absolutely support a healthy distrust of government and i'm grateful to ron paul's recent actions to aid aspects of the patriot act in lapsing ( wether his motives were pure or mainly as a campaign stunt ).
that being said, from following birtherism these past 7 years i've seen a tremendous amount of gullibility and cognitive dissonance on the part of the conspiracy theorists that want to believe. i find it hilarious that they are quick to label others as mindless sheep but will completely embrace the most ridiculous theory, devoid of facts, if it agrees with their belief.
since following birtherism i've began to question my own beliefs on certain conspiracy theories ( namely the assassinations of JFK and RFK ) and hope to revisit them after the birthers have left ( jan 20, 2017 ) with a goal to try and get as close to source material as possible and keep some healthy skepticism about all secondary information.
"Birtherism" isn't as real as the media would have you believe.
The media showcases people and obscure beliefs that will help to tarnish the credibility of anybody that speaks out against the Government or holds an "alternative view" from what the mainstream narrative is.
It seems to have worked obviously as "birtherism" is so often used as a platform for why "conspiracy theorists" are so crazy and wrong.
"Birtherism" is not really a movement-the media showcases it to diminish credibility among "conspiracy theorists" and to steer people away from any alternative history that actually holds weight and matters.
"Birtherism" isn't as real as the media would have you believe.
been following it for 7 years with information generally outside the mainstream media. it's real.
Quote:
The media showcases people and obscure beliefs....
polls consistently show between 30-40% of republicans believe in some form of birtherism. those numbers are far from "obscure".
Quote:
"Birtherism" is not really a movement-the media showcases it to diminish credibility among "conspiracy theorists" ....
so, which conspiracy theory's credibility do you believe is being diminished by the media covering the lunacy that is birtherism?
at one point in the history of birtherism there were claims among some of the birthers that orly taitz was a government agent intentionally trying to make birthers seem like ridiculous buffoons. this was countered by orly's followers who accused those of making such claims of being agents working for the government trying to diminish the work/findings of dr taitz, esq.
my knee-jerk reaction was to answer "no" but......
one thing i've noticed from following birtherism is that every time you're able to debunk a birther belief they come back with a more complex hypothesis ( minus actual evidence ) on how it "could have happened". the more debunking that goes on, the more complex the theory gets.
so, yes, i am less likely to believe a conspiracy theory void of facts the more complex that it gets.
Funny ... I see the world from a totally opposite perspective. Rather than denounce the truth by using such labels as "truther" ... I feel that the proper objective should always be discovering the truth.
Without going into a long, off topic journey here ... this "birtherism" you cite is precisely the great error you and many others make, along with the preoccupation you all have with "debuncking". The hard cold fact is that Obama and his handlers have spared no effort in keeping his past secret, which extends far beyond just his birth certificate. Those that find this secrecy questionable are merely exercising common sense. When such efforts are made to keep secrets, the obvious reason is that there is something in that past to which they do not want revealed. And as for the birth certificate produced, it was clearly manipulated ... absolutely no question about that. NONE. Multiple elements of deliberate fabrication exist. That in and of itself does not prove or disprove Obama's birth place ... it only proves that the evidence he provided is phony.
There are many possibilities as to why such falsified evidence might be created, with the most obvious one being that either no legit document existed, or that the real document contained information Obama wanted to keep secret. Either way, we have a choice ... we can be "truthers", or the opposite ... "liars". I'll take the side of the truth, regardless of the topic of debate. And so should everyone.
who's denouncing the truth? i'm demanding that claims be supported by evidence, not speculation.
Quote:
I feel that the proper objective should always be discovering the truth.
agreed.
Quote:
... along with the preoccupation you all have with "debuncking".
wow. you just claimed to be after the truth and then you're critical of debunking? debunking is showing with evidence when something is not the truth!
Quote:
The hard cold fact is that Obama and his handlers have spared no effort in keeping his past secret,...
access to obama's past has been no different then any other presidential candidate. if you think there has been something significantly different please point out specifically what that is.
Quote:
And as for the birth certificate produced, it was clearly manipulated ... absolutely no question about that. NONE. Multiple elements of deliberate fabrication exist.
wrong. the claims that the "long-form" birth certificate is fake come from incompetent amateurs via the "cold case posse". all experts, even those hired by WND, have stated there are no signs of manual manipulation. your claims of "multiple elements of deliberate fabrication" are easily explained by the standard operating procedures of a xerox workcentre.
Quote:
I'll take the side of the truth,...
you haven't shown it.
Last edited by wrecking ball; 06-06-2015 at 01:57 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
