Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[John Iacoletti]

I don’t actually know of a single person who believes that “hundreds of CIA agents and FBI agents and police officers and autopsy doctors, helped assassinate a President, or helped coverup the assassination of a President. And doing so went against basic American values. And kept this secret.”

[Joe Elliott]

I repeat, the GOP are the conspiracy/propaganda party, not the Dems. Qanon is 100% GOP. You guys watch way too much Fake Fox News and Alex Jones to be a LNer. Otherwise, which Dem believes the 9/11 conspiracy or that the Apollo Moon Landing was hoaxed?

Like Trump you like to repeat your claims. That doesn’t make them true. Anymore than it does for Trump.

The GOP is the conspiracy/propaganda party? Well, under Trump it has certainly drifted into becoming, in part, the propaganda party.

But the GOP is the conspiracy party? I take it that you are a Republican then. Am I right? 

Well, take my advice and do what I am going to do and quit the party. It might not be enough to get you to drop your conspiracy believes but it is worth a shot.

It depends on which conspiracy you’re talking about. What about the 9/11 conspiracy theory? I think the percentage of 9/11 CTers who are Democrats is much higher than it is for Republicans.

It's fine to claim that you don't believe in any Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy Theories but saying it, isn't debunking it. You don't debunk them just because you think they are LSE conspiracies. You must refute them with logic and evidence, otherwise, who cares what you think?

Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracies are inherently unbelievable. It is unbelievable that a large number of people would keep the secret for years. That is why skeptics, over the centuries are skeptical of such theories, like the Elders of Zion conspiracy theory. Us skeptics are just being consistent with our way of thinking.

For example, use some critical thinking to please explain how 2 planes can bring down 3 buildings when no fire has ever brought down a steel framed building, ever. Keep in mind that no steel framed building has ever collapsed into its own footprint at free fall speed because it is physically impossible to do so without explosives. If you were an engineer or a physicist you would understand why. Even the NIST Report conceded that.

No building had ever suddenly had tons and tons of jet fuel suddenly flung into it and ignited. And then had the even larger amount of diesel fuel stored in large tanks for backup power generation catch fire. Experts say such fire won’t melt steel, but it will weaken steel to the point it can no longer support the tremendous loads it can when it is cold. Particularly where the fire insulation is stripped from the steel by the flying debris of the aircraft.

And, again, you reinforce my point that believers in one conspiracy theory tend to be more prone to believing in others. It is good to know that you believe in both a JFK assassination conspiracy theory and the 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Question:

Are there any other conspiracy theories you would like to confess to believing in? Or do you wish to remain silent.

I am not claiming that 9/11 was a LSE conspiracy but I am also unable to debunk it. Can you? Show us how logical you are.

You don’t? How many people do you think it would take to do it and the cover-up? Many experts have claimed they think the planes could bring down the buildings. They tested debris from the buildings and found no chemical evidence of explosives. How many technicians would this take? How many administrators would it take to make certain that no debris is not passed on to the wrong technician who is not in on it?

Large Secret Enduring conspiracies are inherently implausible. An established hypothesis of skeptics for centuries.

[Joe Elliott]

I don’t actually know of a single person who believes that “hundreds of CIA agents and FBI agents and police officers and autopsy doctors, helped assassinate a President, or helped coverup the assassination of a President. And doing so went against basic American values. And kept this secret.”

And I don’t know a single CTer who has itemized all the people they think were involved in the assassination. Let’s take the Dallas police. All the Dallas policemen they think were involved. Who was sent to check for evidence at the Paine house, at Oswald’s room, at Ruby’s apartment and properties? Who would be needed to ensure the wrong policeman is not sent to the wrong place and finds the wrong bit of evidence?

What autopsy doctors are needed to be in on it? Who is needed to be certain the body is sent to the correct set of autopsy doctors? Doesn’t Kennedy’s doctor, Read Admiral George Burley and Mrs. Kennedy have to be on that list?

I don’t need all the names. Just all the bogus pieces of bogus evidence, CE-399, photographs, film, etc., and a list of people (don’t need all the names) needed to pull this all of. Something like 20 officers plus 5 administrators to make certain only the 20 officers are sent on investigations of sensitive sites.

The lack of such a list provided by CTers, not even a single CTer, means that such a list is so large, they prefer not to provide one.

The goal of this conspiracy, commonly assigned to get the United States involved in the Vietnam war certainly implies a large conspiracy is needed to pull this off.

[Jack Trojan]

Like Trump you like to repeat your claims. That doesn’t make them true. Anymore than it does for Trump.

The GOP is the conspiracy/propaganda party? Well, under Trump it has certainly drifted into becoming, in part, the propaganda party.

But the GOP is the conspiracy party? I take it that you are a Republican then. Am I right? 

Well, take my advice and do what I am going to do and quit the party. It might not be enough to get you to drop your conspiracy believes but it is worth a shot.

More HS. Not all Dems are pseudo-skeptics but you do have to be a Rep to be Qanon. I am neither. Even though you are no longer a Rep, I'll bet you are still Q. Am I right?

It depends on which conspiracy you’re talking about. What about the 9/11 conspiracy theory? I think the percentage of 9/11 CTers who are Democrats is much higher than it is for Republicans.

HS.

Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracies are inherently unbelievable. It is unbelievable that a large number of people would keep the secret for years. That is why skeptics, over the centuries are skeptical of such theories, like the Elders of Zion conspiracy theory. Us skeptics are just being consistent with our way of thinking.

Pseudo-skeptics you mean. Your default position is to scoff at all conspiracies until they are proven true. That’s not how science works. Science has no default position. It treats each case on its own merits. You seem to think all conspiracies are crazy LSE conspiracies by default unless proven otherwise. Tell that to the HSCA, who actually had scientists working for them, not pseudo-skeptics.

No building had ever suddenly had tons and tons of jet fuel suddenly flung into it and ignited. And then had the even larger amount of diesel fuel stored in large tanks for backup power generation catch fire. Experts say such fire won’t melt steel, but it will weaken steel to the point it can no longer support the tremendous loads it can when it is cold. Particularly where the fire insulation is stripped from the steel by the flying debris of the aircraft.

You don’t have a clue so I would expect you to come up with more HS. Like I said before, unless you are an engineer or a physicist and you know what you are talking about you are destined to reach 1 conclusion, 9/11 Truthers are CT nutjobs who hate America and love Bin Laden.

Factoid 4U: A fire on the 99th floor cannot compromise the steel frame on the 1st floor or any floors below it. And since the steel frame on every floor is designed to hold the entire weight of the building, it is impossible for a steel framed building to pancake into its own footprint unless every floor is compromised. But building 7 didn’t pancake to the ground, it was in free fall for a few seconds, which means zero resistance, which is impossible, especially since no plane struck building 7 and no kerosene fires compromised the steel structure. Didn’t they teach you any of this in science class?

And, again, you reinforce my point that believers in one conspiracy theory tend to be more prone to believing in others. It is good to know that you believe in both a JFK assassination conspiracy theory and the 9/11 conspiracy theory.

I never said 9/11 was a conspiracy, only that the conspiracy can't be debunked and we don’t know the whole story.  Especially you. You don't seem to know anything about it. Just regurgitated HS.

Question:

Are there any other conspiracy theories you would like to confess to believing in? Or do you wish to remain silent.

I’m pretty sure Pizzagate was real. Sandy Hook too. And the Russian Hoax smacks of conspiracy.

You don’t? How many people do you think it would take to do it and the cover-up? Many experts have claimed they think the planes could bring down the buildings. They tested debris from the buildings and found no chemical evidence of explosives. How many technicians would this take? How many administrators would it take to make certain that no debris is not passed on to the wrong technician who is not in on it?

I already told you but you’re a pseudo-scoftic that applies no critical thinking or logic to come to your skeptical views, just your default position regarding your silly assumptions....“Large Secret Enduring conspiracies are inherently implausible. An established hypothesis of skeptics for centuries.”

Talk is cheap pseudo-skeptic. Stop psycho-analyzing members and start actually debunking something or STFU.

[Joe Elliott]

More HS. Not all Dems are pseudo-skeptics but you do have to be a Rep to be Qanon. I am neither. Even though you are no longer a Rep, I'll bet you are still Q. Am I right?
HS.

I was never a Qanon or a believer in any other Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy Theory. I thought I made that pretty clear.

By the way, if you’re an advocate of conspiracy theories, or building a wall along the Mexican border, you don’t want to say that the damm Republican Party is the party that believes in conspiracy theories or building walls. You end up looking kind of ridiculous.

Pseudo-skeptics you mean. Your default position is to scoff at all conspiracies until they are proven true. That’s not how science works. Science has no default position. It treats each case on its own merits. You seem to think all conspiracies are crazy LSE conspiracies by default unless proven otherwise. Tell that to the HSCA, who actually had scientists working for them, not pseudo-skeptics.

No, a real skeptic. And it has been the consistent position of the real skeptics to be very skeptical of Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracies. And this has been true for over one hundred years. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And, so far as I know, the skeptics have never accepted a Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy as being real.

So, no. It’s not just the pseudo-skeptics who reject the JFK conspiracy theory, the 9/11 U. S. Government conspiracy theory, the Pizzagate conspiracy theory (are you for real) and the Sandy Hook conspiracy theory (are you for real). Real skeptics reject all of these Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy theories. I don’t think you will even find much support for these conspiracy theories even among the member of this board, let alone among true skeptics.

You don’t have a clue so I would expect you to come up with more HS. Like I said before, unless you are an engineer or a physicist and you know what you are talking about you are destined to reach 1 conclusion, 9/11 Truthers are CT nutjobs who hate America and love Bin Laden.

Factoid 4U: A fire on the 99th floor cannot compromise the steel frame on the 1st floor or any floors below it. And since the steel frame on every floor is designed to hold the entire weight of the building, it is impossible for a steel framed building to pancake into its own footprint unless every floor is compromised. But building 7 didn’t pancake to the ground, it was in free fall for a few seconds, which means zero resistance, which is impossible, especially since no plane struck building 7 and no kerosene fires compromised the steel structure. Didn’t they teach you any of this in science class?

How a building collapse? No. I only took a physics course in high school and a freshman physics course in college. And learned about basic Newtonian physics. But nothing about how buildings collapse. But I suspect you took even less physics than I did.

I never said 9/11 was a conspiracy, only that the conspiracy can't be debunked and we don’t know the whole story.  Especially you. You don't seem to know anything about it. Just regurgitated HS.

I’m pretty sure Pizzagate was real. Sandy Hook too. And the Russian Hoax smacks of conspiracy.

I already told you but you’re a pseudo-scoftic that applies no critical thinking or logic to come to your skeptical views, just your default position regarding your silly assumptions....“Large Secret Enduring conspiracies are inherently implausible. An established hypothesis of skeptics for centuries.”

Talk is cheap pseudo-skeptic. Stop psycho-analyzing members and start actually debunking something or STFU.

So, let’s list the conspiracy theories you support:
•   JFK conspiracy theory, of course.
•   9/11, unexplainable, except by a large government secret conspiracy.
•   Pizzagate conspiracy, Democratic Party involved in human trafficking and a child sex ring
•   Sandy Hook conspiracy, where a mass murder of school children was not the act of one man but of a government conspiracy, that may, or may not, have involved any real killings. This conspiracy was to help enact gun control.

I am not certain, but you may stand alone at this board in the number of conspiracy theories you believe in.

[John Iacoletti]

I think the percentage of 9/11 CTers who are Democrats is much higher than it is for Republicans.

Why?

[John Iacoletti]

And I don’t know a single CTer who has itemized all the people they think were involved in the assassination. Let’s take the Dallas police. All the Dallas policemen they think were involved.

Who is this “they” that you speak of?

This is one big strawman argument.

[Richard Smith]

False. Readers should go back to page 311 and judge for themselves.

They don't call him "Dishonest" John for nothing.