Jump to content
The Education Forum
Cory Santos

I understand why people hate conspiracies

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Well I think no-one can deny that 9/11 was a conspiracy in the literal sense of the word. At least 11 people conspired to bring down the World Trade Center. I don't know what exactly John Newman believes, but I think confessions given under torture are completely worthless. I haven't done too much reading on this subject but it appears there's at least some circumstantial evidence that Saudi government officials might have aided the terrorists.

But anyway, maybe we could at least agree that it takes a "conspiratorial mindset" to uncover actual conspiracies?

Here you go re Newman and 9/11, if you have two hours to spend.  I just skimmed it, but it seems to be more Deep Politics-type stuff than the wild-and-crazy 9/11 stuff.  All the Deep Politics intrigue frankly just makes my eyes glaze over.  The notion that LHO was a false defector and CIA operative during his time in Russia just strikes me as laugh-out-loud goofy.  No one I know who has ever really looked seriously into this or actually knew LHO during his time in Minsk believes this.  Peter Vronsky, http://www.russianbooks.org/oswald-in-russia.htm, who spent considerable time in Minsk working on a documentary (his site is excellent) told me last year by email that he went there fully expecting to document LHO's intelligence connections and activities and came back thinking that the WC "pretty much got it right."

No, I don't think it takes a conspiratorial mindset to uncover actual conspiracies.  Not at all.  It takes what it takes to solve any crime.  The conspiracy mindset is irrelevant except to the extent that it predisposes those who have it to see events in terms of conspiracy.  I can't envision any scenario where the conspiracy mindset would be an aid to clear thinking - where someone with the conspiracy mindset would see reality more clearly or even discover a conspiracy more quickly.  Those who don't have the conspiracy mindset don't have an anti-conspiracy mindset, if that's what you're suggesting; they have a neutral mindset (unless, of course, they are among those who resist conspiracy thinking in a particular area because it would challenge their religious beliefs or worldviews).

 

 

 

Edited by Lance Payette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

For the record, John Lear was a hoaxer on the UFO scene.  I know this from someone who dealt with him personally.

Cooper was on both scenes.

Surprising that our Colorado lawyer did not smoke them out.

1.  I am not a Colorado lawyer.  You seem to be hopelessly confused.

2.  Indeed I did "smoke them out" - in 1989.  As I made clear, I was stunned that these two loons were presenting on the same stage with someone of the caliber of Jacques Vallee.  No one outside of the lunatic fringe ever took Lear seriously; he gained an audience solely because he was from the family of Learjet fame.  Bill Cooper was both insane and dangerous, which is why he was ultimately gunned down by sheriff's deputies practically in my back yard.

"For the record," you might try reading more carefully.  Don't try to one-up me on UFO stuff, booby, because you are WAY out of your league in that discussion.

Edited by Lance Payette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Lance, I'm not sure there is anyone here more adept than you at using lots and lots of words to say nothing.

Quite possibly, but at least I don't have 4000 posts saying the same thing.  At least I don't post 57 times a day to remind people that I don't stoop to engaging in Fake Debate.  Are contributions such as the above part of your effort to "weaponize the salient fact of conspiracy in the murder of JFK" or have you moved on to a new phase of just being kind of a roaming jackass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

1.  I am not a Colorado lawyer.  You seem to be hopelessly confused.

2.  Indeed I did "smoke them out" - in 1989.  As I made clear, I was stunned that these two loons were presenting on the same stage with someone of the caliber of Jacques Vallee.  No one outside of the lunatic fringe ever took Lear seriously; he gained an audience solely because he was from the family of Learjet fame.  Bill Cooper was both insane and dangerous, which is why he was ultimately gunned down by sheriff's deputies practically in my back yard.

"For the record," you might try reading more carefully.  Don't try to one-up me on UFO stuff, booby, because you are WAY out of your league in that discussion.

Oh Lance, I represent Mr. Lear.    Are your comments libel friend?  

Let me say, you know so little and really disappointed me with this post.

Mr. Lear is brilliant.  Whether one accepts his theories or not, he is brilliant.  He has done more than you could ever know or do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

For the record, John Lear was a hoaxer on the UFO scene.  I know this from someone who dealt with him personally.

Cooper was on both scenes.

Surprising that our Colorado lawyer did not smoke them out.

Sorry Jim, I represent Mr. Lear, to talk to him for 30 minutes in private is like hearing a 3 hour fascinating presentation of what is to come.  I will see something in the news that he told me about and will shake my head that he knew something years ago that would happen.  

I cannot say too much but he has pressed the UFO issue.  I think I know what you might be referring to but...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Oh Lance, I represent Mr. Lear.    Are your comments libel friend?  

Let me say, you know so little and really disappointed me with this post.

Mr. Lear is brilliant.  Whether one accepts his theories or not, he is brilliant.  He has done more than you could ever know or do.

He may well be brilliant, for all I know.  Bill Cooper (of "Behold a Pale Horse" fame) wasn't stupid by any means, but he was insane and dangerous.  Lear was part of a presentation with Cooper at the 1989 MUFON conference that was jaw-droppingly goofy.  I was there, pal.  Indeed, Cooper and Lear were a veritable traveling road show.  See "John Lear and the Dark Side," https://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/john-lear.htm ("In recent years new and even wilder strains of paranoia have sprouted along ufology's fringes. Inspiration comes not just from UFO rumors but from conspiracy theories associated with the far right end of the political spectrum. The two major figures in what has been called the 'dark side movement' are John Lear, a pilot who once flew aircraft for a CIA-linked company, and Milton William Cooper, a retired Navy petty officer").  A quick Google search will reveal titles such as "Is John Lear 100% Crazy Now?", "John Lear's Insane Babblings," "John Lear - Lazar Promoter and Fake CIA Agent."  And that's just from the first page of Google results!  Maybe you can put together the first-ever class action libel complaint?

You must be a complete neophyte in this field.  I've been up to my ears in ufology for more than 50 years.  And not as a debunker - I had a close-up daylight disk sighting myself in the company of a diehard skeptic who just about crapped in his pants.  I'm sure that I'd find Lear fascinating and enjoyable to visit with.  I'm sure I'd find John Armstrong enthralling.  I'm sure I'd find Jim DiEugenio … well, no, I won't go that far, but he'd probably be tolerable for a couple of hours if he was buying the drinks.  One of my close friends is a lawyer who is one of the genuine pioneers and demigods of ufology.  He's brilliant and fascinating, too, but no one outside the lunatic fringe of ufology takes him seriously these days.

Please, enjoy your time with Lear.  But don't come on here trying to peddle him as some statesman or making "libel" noises with someone who actually knows a little bit about the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

He may well be brilliant, for all I know.  Bill Cooper (of "Behold a Pale Horse" fame) wasn't stupid by any means, but he was insane and dangerous.  Lear was part of a presentation with Cooper at the 1989 MUFON conference that was jaw-droppingly goofy.  I was there, pal.  Indeed, Cooper and Lear were a veritable traveling road show.  See "John Lear and the Dark Side," https://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/john-lear.htm ("In recent years new and even wilder strains of paranoia have sprouted along ufology's fringes. Inspiration comes not just from UFO rumors but from conspiracy theories associated with the far right end of the political spectrum. The two major figures in what has been called the 'dark side movement' are John Lear, a pilot who once flew aircraft for a CIA-linked company, and Milton William Cooper, a retired Navy petty officer").  A quick Google search will reveal titles such as "Is John Lear 100% Crazy Now?", "John Lear's Insane Babblings," "John Lear - Lazar Promoter and Fake CIA Agent."  And that's just from the first page of Google results!  Maybe you can put together the first-ever class action libel complaint?

You must be a complete neophyte in this field.  I've been up to my ears in ufology for more than 50 years.  And not as a debunker - I had a close-up daylight disk sighting myself in the company of a diehard skeptic who just about crapped in his pants.  I'm sure that I'd find Lear fascinating and enjoyable to visit with.  I'm sure I'd find John Armstrong enthralling.  I'm sure I'd find Jim DiEugenio … well, no, I won't go that far, but he'd probably be tolerable for a couple of hours if he was buying the drinks.  One of my close friends is a lawyer who is one of the genuine pioneers and demigods of ufology.  He's brilliant and fascinating, too, but no one outside the lunatic fringe of ufology takes him seriously these days.

Please, enjoy your time with Lear.  But don't come on here trying to peddle him as some statesman or making "libel" noises with someone who actually knows a little bit about the law.

I never said he was a statesman, lol.  Objection, counsel is making things up!

Yes, we all know you have been a UFO person and lawyer for googleplex years.  We are all impressed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

Quite possibly,

Oh no, quite definitely.  You treat your mush-mouth musings as some kind of higher truth, but you're all rhetoric and bluster.

Quote

 

but at least I don't have 4000 posts saying the same thing.

You don't read all my posts.  You have no clue what subjects I discuss.

Quote

At least I don't post 57 times a day to remind people that I don't stoop to engaging in Fake Debate.

What debate?  You're not here to "debate" anything given your fact-free posts. 

I don't debate David Von Pein, I simply quote his own words.

Litwin, Carlier and Parnell don't dare challenge anything I write on the salient facts of conspiracy.

So where am I engaged in Fake Debate?

Quote

 

  Are contributions such as the above part of your effort to "weaponize the salient fact of conspiracy in the murder of JFK" or have you moved on to a new phase of just being kind of a roaming jackass?

I'd rather be a jackass than a fundamentalist Christian hypocrite.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

What debate?  You're not here to "debate" anything given your fact-free posts. 

Now don't cry, big fella, you'll make me cry too.  I believe it would be humanly impossible for anyone to take himself more seriously or display more self-importance than the regulars on this forum.  I have participated on many, many Internet forums for more than 20 years and don't recall ever encountering a more humorless, obsessive, self-important bunch.  So I do enjoy tweaking you folks.

Be that as it may, not all my posts are fact-free.  To refresh your memory, I discovered the File Locator Number on the postal money order and exposed that silliness … helped Tracy expose the "missing LHO birth certificate" silliness … pretty much made mincemeat of the "LHO junior high school records" silliness … exposed David's mistake regarding the engineering rod that he thought was showing LHO as 5'-7" … helped Steve clarify some Russian documents relating to his employment at the Minsk radio factory … and exposed that at least a couple of John Armstrong's citations didn't support what was being stated in his text.

Mostly small-time accomplishments, to be sure, but not too bad for someone who is barely trying.

My latest posts have indeed been fact-free because what this place needs, and what drives conspiracy theorists insane, is common sense and logic.  Common sense and logic are anathema to conspiracy theorists.  They want to examine the postal money order with an electron microscope, obsess over the magic bullet until everyone is cross-eyed.  Step in with common sense and logic and say "Listen, folks, this makes no sense at all" and they don't know what to do.

In case you hadn't noticed, the original post on this thread, and all posts since, are fact-free.  It's a fact-free topic.  Considering that my posts are so tedious and boring, I find it curious that I keep getting all these notifications that I've received a reply.  Don't reply to this one and we'll be done - see how easy that was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

Now don't cry, big fella, you'll make me cry too. 

Excuse me?

This is what psychologists call "projection."

Quote

I believe it would be humanly impossible for anyone to take himself more seriously or display more self-importance than the regulars on this forum.  I have participated on many, many Internet forums for more than 20 years and don't recall ever encountering a more humorless, obsessive, self-important bunch.

Hilarious coming from a guy who finds the need to brag about how smart he is.

Quote

 

  So I do enjoy tweaking you folks.

What tweaking?

A condescending attitude doesn't work if you can't cite facts.

Quote

Be that as it may, not all my posts are fact-free.  To refresh your memory, I discovered the File Locator Number on the postal money order and exposed that silliness … helped Tracy expose the "missing LHO birth certificate" silliness … pretty much made mincemeat of the "LHO junior high school records" silliness … exposed David's mistake regarding the engineering rod that he thought was showing LHO as 5'-7" … helped Steve clarify some Russian documents relating to his employment at the Minsk radio factory … and exposed that at least a couple of John Armstrong's citations didn't support what was being stated in his text.

Mostly small-time accomplishments, to be sure, but not too bad for someone who is barely trying.

I think the Oswald Assassination is a major rabbit hole, so put me down as unimpressed.

Quote

My latest posts have indeed been fact-free because what this place needs, and what drives conspiracy theorists insane, is common sense and logic.

No, your posts are fact-free because the physical facts of the case elude you.

Quote

 Common sense and logic are anathema to conspiracy theorists.  They want to examine the postal money order with an electron microscope, obsess over the magic bullet until everyone is cross-eyed.  Step in with common sense and logic and say "Listen, folks, this makes no sense at all" and they don't know what to do.

In case you hadn't noticed, the original post on this thread, and all posts since, are fact-free.  It's a fact-free topic.  Considering that my posts are so tedious and boring, I find it curious that I keep getting all these notifications that I've received a reply.  Don't reply to this one and we'll be done - see how easy that was?

I'd rather take the piss out of your hypocrisy.

It's fun getting under the skin of a fundamentalist Christian Lone Nutter who doesn't possess the cognitive ability to observe the movement of his own shirt.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The WC was neither a court, nor a fact finding body.

Dead wrong (as per usual).

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

You raise a point that has puzzled me as well:  Why would a Lone Nutter repeatedly return to a place such as this and beat his head against the wall? 

In a (lone) nutshell, my answer would be....

I do it mainly in order to add various discussions to my "JFK Archives" and "Assorted JFK Assassination Arguments" websites (blogs).

XX.+DVP+JFK+Archives+Logo.png     XX.+Assorted+JFK+Assassination+Arguments

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yeah that is why he [DVP] has to edit these things to transfer to his site and give himself the last word.

And Jim never gives himself (or another CTer) "the last word" in the articles on his K&K website, right Jim?

Pot meets Kettle ....... yet again.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

LN's also like to focus in on a piece of evidence as if it existed in a vacuum and ignore the other circumstantial evidence out there that might cast doubt. To them, each issue is a game that they must win. Any serious and legitimate unanswered question is just a mole to be whacked before moving on to the next one.

That's funny. I've always said that it was the CTers, not LNers, who do that very thing---isolate.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/isolating-evidence.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

I am not a Colorado lawyer. You [Jim DiEugenio] seem to be hopelessly confused.

Maybe the word "Arizona" here looks like "Colorado" to Mr. Jim....

Lance-Icon.png

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×