Ricky Varandas, Is Fake Science Evil? |530|

By knowing about it, and doing nothing to stop it, they participated.
That’s enough.
what is your proof they knew about it and did nothing?That it could have been prevented?

Read the official report. It's extremely thorough. It explains the bureaucratic breakdowns that caused intelligence to not be collated; unclear intelligence at that.
 
what is your proof they knew about it and did nothing?That it could have been prevented?

Read the official report. It's extremely thorough. It explains the bureaucratic breakdowns that caused intelligence to not be collated; unclear intelligence at that.
Ya, and I’m sure the Jan 6 report will say there was no way the agencies could have prevented the Capitol from being stormed. And just give it 10 years and you’ll lap it up because it’s “official”.
 
Ya, and I’m sure the Jan 6 report will say there was no way the agencies could have prevented the Capitol from being stormed. And just give it 10 years and you’ll lap it up because it’s “official”.
Yes, of course. Everyone is lying to you except YouTube guy.

You're like the perfect mark; an easy dupe. You have no ability to discriminate.

You cannot tell the difference between a very simple scenario in which a crowd was being egged on by a political operative and a partisan congressional committee comprised of low IQ and even lower ethics politicians looking to score cheap political points - and a serious complex attack on the country that killed thousands and that has been investigated by the best investigators we have, deliberately and thoroughly looking at all of the evidence, because that is thier job and because they are dedicated patriots that were extremely pissed off at the attack and wanted to identify and get whoever did it.

It's like you've never been involved in anything in the real world beyond your little community and a little job within it. Like you have no idea how anything works (or doesn't work).

I really didn't want to go there, but maybe it would be good for you to know how you appear to someone who has been out in the world, getting around and doing things.

If I put on the same act as youtube guy, I could sell you anything. But I would never do that, personally, because I have honor.

If any of that strikes you as harsh or insulting, remember, you're insulting me and family members and brothers and sisters in arms and all the veterans that ever served our country. You're saying that the bulk of them would lie about an attack on our country (or a lie by remaining silent about the truth). Worse, you/CTists are saying they would participate in a mass attack against the country and people they are sworn to protect. Shitty low life politicians are not veterans military or veteran intelligence. Screw you.
 
Last edited:
This is tantamount to obfuscation or misdirection.
When it is said “Jews did 9/11” or “George bush did 9/11”, or “CIA did 9/11”.
Nobody in CT is using the word “did” in the way you’re forcing it.
you’re attacking strawmen.



That video is a trip! In 99 I was in New York and visited the twin towers. I grew up in the San Francisco bay area, so I wasn't a stranger to large buildings. However, the buildings in New York were as if you injected heavy amounts of steroids into those of San Francisco, sex changed them to male, then splattered a little bit of Gothic décor here and there.

It was a crazy adventure whereas 21 year old me got swept up my a 30 year old woman from Belgium, as I was suppose to be her birthday present. I was living on a couch in an apartment, with two roommates, no car, and working at a party supply store. Those were some long walks through dirty creeks everyday. Just for fun, I hopped on my roommates computer one shitty day after work and found a random AOL chatroom. Next thing you know, I get a private message from a woman saying "Eloher." Interestingly enough, I was using my roommates screen name, Elohim. Long story short, we got to talking on the phone, and soon, I ended up with a plane ticket in the mailbox.

The twin tower thing is strange to me because I clearly recall visiting them for a long time, laying down on a cement bench between them and staring up at them, for at least 30 minutes. I was baffled by the shear size of these monoliths, and also the strange, diamond shaped architecture around the windows. That very night, I had an incredibly vivid nightmare that they were both destroyed. It was so real, that I woke up believing that they were actually destroyed, but I looked at the window from the flat I was staying at in Brooklyn.....and they were still there!

Nevertheless, two years later, they are gone!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, of course. Everyone is lying to you except YouTube guy.

You're like the perfect mark; an easy dupe. You have no ability to discriminate.

You cannot tell the difference between a very simple scenario in which a crowd was being egged on by a political operative and a partisan congressional committee comprised of low IQ and even lower ethics politicians looking to score cheap political points - and a serious complex attack on the country that killed thousands and that has been investigated by the best investigators we have, deliberately and thoroughly looking at all of the evidence, because that is thier job and because they are dedicated patriots that were extremely pissed off at the attack and wanted to identify and get whoever did it.

It's like you've never been involved in anything in the real world beyond your little community and a little job within it. Like you have no idea how anything works (or doesn't work).

I really didn't want to go there, but maybe it would be good for you to know how you appear to someone who has been out in the world, getting around and doing things.

If I put on the same act as youtube guy, I could sell you anything. But I would never do that, personally, because I have honor.

If any of that strikes you as harsh or insulting, remember, you're insulting me and family members and brothers and sisters in arms and all the veterans that ever served our country. You're saying that the bulk of them would lie about an attack on our country (or a lie by remaining silent about the truth). Worse, you/CTists are saying they would participate in a mass attack against the country and people they are sworn to protect. Shitty low life politicians are not veterans military or veteran intelligence. Screw you.

Ahhh, you don't mean that G, Robbedigital is a cool dude!
 
That's a great question.

And indeed, most of my top issues involve that issue of profit/greed.

But related to that, is attracting a better quality of leadership.

Some of recommendations might seem backwards, but I think they'd be mostly bringing improvements - for example the President should be paid $20 million/yr (tax free). Senators limited to 2 terms, but paid at $5 million/yr and reps in the house limited to three terms and something like $ million per/yr.

This would attract top talent and help remove the incentive (or need) to make a career out of pork, backroom deals that screw the country, etc. The term limits would also help eliminate incestuous relationships from developing.

Also, campaign serious finance reform. And the "debate" format would be totally revised. It wouldn't be the media asking dumb questions with the candidates responding with shallow slogans and slinging mud at each other. Rather, it would representatives of key industry sectors and some ordinary work a day people holding serious job interviews. No interaction between the candidates. They'd only respond to the panel members.

Media reform is necessary too. Much monopoly busting needed. Free channels sponsored by an NGO that would maintain score cards on the elected officials, status on achievement of goals, status of behavior with lobbyists and foreign governments. No advertising on these channels. No corporate sponsors at all.

Better people in charge means less reliance on the odious and dangerous "think tanks"

Illegal and punishable by harsh prison sentences or death for government officials, elected or appointed to have any personally enriching deals with foreign governments or individuals. Obviously no election or "foundation" $ from those sources either.

Then basically a Trumpian plan to make America great again. Build domestically and limit foreign ownership of American assets.

Congress must declare war. No executive only ordering troops into combat.

Disband the FBI. Replace it with US Marshals. Disband the CIA and replace its purview with the DIA.

Limits on number of years that Directors, Deputy Directors can serve in govt (again to eliminate incestuous relationships developing).

Schools return to a classical education. Trade schools for those not academically inclined.


Close our borders. Cut off incentives for welfare lifestyles.

Do these things correctly and I think we have a decent country again

But I'm getting ahead of myself.

I don't think that you are getting ahead of yourself, and a lot of this makes sense. However, I would not pay politicians rap star money. I think that would make politics even worse than what it is now. Next thing you know, some politician holds a rally and we have another Travis Scott incident.
 
I find it fascinating that if the government sponsors an investigation - like JFK and 9/11 - then the CT community dismisses the findings as just part of the massive government conspiracy. Official = lies. However, some dude on YouTube, well he would never lie to us. Listen! He has the facts!

But those "facts" are never examined in light of the entirety of what is known. For example, 95% of what is known and provable clearly makes the convincing case that Islamic terrorists perpetrated 9/11. There's 5% that is a little less clear, but that can be reasonably well explained by the "official narrative" (in CT parlance). Like steel weakened by burning jet fuel and building 7 damaged by the collapse of the main towers as well as having weakened steel from fires. We'll never know 100% for sure that is exactly how the building collapsed unless we construct exact duplicates of the buildings, then damage them the same way the originals were damaged by speeding jumbo jets smashing into them and then dousing them in tons of jet fuel and igniting the jet fuel. But damage from airplanes crashing and burning jet fuel makes sense given that it can be modeled, given that the model is accepted by the majority of engineers that evaluate the theory and given that we all saw airplanes crashing into the building and fires erupting combined with the intelligence and mountains of other evidence.
I don't deny what you have written about the collapse process. Furthermore, my hunch would be that the precise physics of such extreme situations may be hard to model properly. If there is a CT embedded in that, it must surely be that intelligence was overlooked to enable that event to happen. Why - in order to justify the attack on Iraq, which was basically pretty pointless.

As for JFK, he was murdered when I was just a schoolboy. It is too far back to interest me greatly.

I do recognise a probably CT in connection with COVID.

Do you disagree with any of that?

David
 
I If there is a CT embedded in that, it must surely be that intelligence was overlooked to enable that event to happen. Why - in order to justify the attack on Iraq, which was basically pretty pointless.

Emphasis on the word "if" - there is no evidence of deliberately ignored intelligence. I posted a link (above) to an official study of the bureaucratic breakdown involved. The subject was studied intensely because jihadists would surely try again and organizations to be better prepared to handle the threats. Large org.s miss the mark all of time. For an example, read up on the failure of Kodac to understand the popularity of digital photography and to, basically, go under as a result.

With regards to the Iraq invasion, as I keep saying just because an opportunity presents doesn't mean there was a conspiracy to create the opportunity


I do recognise a probably CT in connection with COVID.

I am on the fence. It could be a mass psychosis + opportunism + bad risk assessment on most people's part + the media hyping for views + a little conspiracy here and there in the mix. All of those appear present to me. That said, there is a basis in reality because there really is a virus and it really is a threat to the elderly and infirm. It can shave a year or three off their lives. That is something that should be acted on in the minds of many. people are not good at risk assessment or cost/benefit analysis (see also global warming).

Allow me to leave you with a couple serious questions.
1. Would you happy with eliminating our respective judicial systems and replacing them with a panel comprised of conspiracy theorists using their current CT methods of research, levels of proof and quality of judgment? If not, why not? - Say panel members being Alex and some his CT minded guests.
2. Is there anything about the CT community that reminds you of a cult?
 
Last edited:
That video is a trip! In 99 I was in New York and visited the twin towers. I grew up in the San Francisco bay area, so I wasn't a stranger to large buildings. However, the buildings in New York were as if you injected heavy amounts of steroids into those of San Francisco, sex changed them to male, then splattered a little bit of Gothic décor here and there.

It was a crazy adventure whereas 21 year old me got swept up my a 30 year old woman from Belgium, as I was suppose to be here birthday present. I was living on a couch in an apartment, with two roommates, no car, and working at a party supply store. Those were some long walks through dirty creeks everyday. Just for fun, I hopped on my roommates computer one shitty day after work and found a random AOL chatroom. Next thing you know, I get a private message from a woman saying "Eloher." Interestingly enough, I was using my roommates screen name, Elohim. Long story short, we got to talking on the phone, and soon, I ended up with a plane ticket in the mailbox.

The twin tower thing is strange to me because I clearly recall visiting them for a long time, laying down on a cement bench between them and staring up at them, for at least 30 minutes. I was baffled by the shear size of these monoliths, and also the strange, diamond shaped architecture around the windows. That very night, I had an incredibly vivid nightmare that they were both destroyed. It was so real, that I woke up believing that they were actually destroyed, but I looked at the window from the flat I was staying at in Brooklyn.....and they were still there!

Nevertheless, two years later, they are gone!
Amazing Story. Thank you for sharing it. I bet you caught a vibe on it. You know, like Sheldrakes Morphic Resonance surely doesn't stop at rats learning tricks in mazes, and dogs sensing their owner intentions long distance.
 
Emphasis on the word "if" - there is no evidence of deliberately ignored intelligence. I posted a link (above) to an official study of the bureaucratic breakdown involved.
The problem with that, is that the only people who would be able to study intelligence matters would be ..... intelligence personnel. We had FOUR inquiries into Blair's handling of the WMD issue and the war in Iraq. The last inquiry was the only one critical of what Blair did (with some help from Bush).
I am on the fence. It could be a mass psychosis + opportunism + bad risk assessment on most people's part + the media hyping for views + a little conspiracy here and there in the mix. All of those appear present to me. That said, there is a basis in reality because there really is a virus and it really is a threat to the elderly and infirm. It can shave a year or three off their lives. That is something that should be acted on in the minds of many. people are not good at risk assessment or cost/benefit analysis (see also global warming).

It is just possible we might find answers to some of that. Boris was just about to lock us down again for Xmas, when a newspaper exposed some evidence that the committee of scientists advising the government were producing their advice to suit someone else's agenda - probably someone in the Civil Service.

The critical thing to realise about that virus, is that people with other illnesses are seriously at risk from it, but it is common knowledge that people with cancer and some other deadly illnesses were often actually take by a viral infection. My partner's mother died like that. We were told that she had developed a bad chest infection that would probably kill her. This was normal.

David
 
Amazing Story. Thank you for sharing it. I bet you caught a vibe on it. You know, like Sheldrakes Morphic Resonance surely doesn't stop at rats learning tricks in mazes, and dogs sensing their owner intentions long distance.

It could be his brain glitched and instead of remembering backwards like usual, it remembered forwards by mistake. Either way, he saw the future and it was murder.

1. Would you happy with eliminating our respective judicial systems and replacing them with a panel comprised of conspiracy theorists using their current CT methods of research, levels of proof and quality of judgment? If not, why not? - Say panel members being Alex and some his CT minded guests.

Maybe. It would make for good TV.
 
Last edited:
Read the official report. It's extremely thorough. It explains the bureaucratic breakdowns that caused intelligence to not be collated; unclear intelligence at that.

Do you mean this one ‘The 9/11 Commission Report’?

Can a report really be seen as “extremely thorough” when you have comments like this written by it’s Chair & Vice Chair?

“The chair and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, respectively Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, assert in their book, Without Precedent, that they were "set up to fail" and were starved of funds to do a proper investigation. They also confirm that they were denied access to the truth and misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the federal aviation authority; and that this obstruction and deception led them to contemplate slapping officials with criminal charges.”

“In a 2006 interview with anchorman Evan Soloman of CBC's Sunday programme, the vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, was reminded that the commission report failed to even mention the collapse of WTC7 or the suspicious hurried removal of the building debris from the site - before there could be a proper forensic investigation of what was a crime scene. Hamilton could only offer the lame excuse that the commissioners did not have "unlimited time" and could not be expected to answer "every question" the public asks.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/12/911thebigcoverup
 
Last edited:
Do you mean this one ‘The 9/11 Commission Report’?

Can a report really be seen as “extremely thorough” when you have comments like this written by it’s Chair & Vice Chair?

“The chair and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, respectively Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, assert in their book, Without Precedent, that they were "set up to fail" and were starved of funds to do a proper investigation. They also confirm that they were denied access to the truth and misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the federal aviation authority; and that this obstruction and deception led them to contemplate slapping officials with criminal charges.”

“In a 2006 interview with anchorman Evan Soloman of CBC's Sunday programme, the vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, was reminded that the commission report failed to even mention the collapse of WTC7 or the suspicious hurried removal of the building debris from the site - before there could be a proper forensic investigation of what was a crime scene. Hamilton could only offer the lame excuse that the commissioners did not have "unlimited time" and could not be expected to answer "every question" the public asks.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/12/911thebigcoverup
The report was thorough w/ regards to counter terrorism failures.

They did not bother to address the objects of paranoid schizophrenic delusions, like building 7, because it would be a waste of time and resources. Non-mentally ill people understood that hijackers crashed airplanes into the towers (and Pentagon) and that building 7 was damaged by the collapse of the main towers and that it burned for several hours.

Rather, the report's purpose was to understand how the terrorists were able to organize and carry out their attack and how we failed to stop it, as opposed to the mechanics of falling buildings. The latter was a topic taken up by other organizations.

Kean eventually developed his own agenda and was selling a book. His statements can be explained by internal politics and a CYA on his part. He had been a member of a committee that was warned of red flags concerning an imminent terrorist attack, but that was accused of dropping the ball. The best defense is a good offense. + sensationalism to attract readers to purchase the book.

Observe that the report did not look into the role of lizard people, the Illuminati or satanic pedophiles in the attack - or how a flat earth effected the mechanics of the buildings' structural failures. So yeah, maybe the committee was remiss after all.
 
Last edited:
The problem with that, is that the only people who would be able to study intelligence matters would be ..... intelligence personnel. We had FOUR inquiries into Blair's handling of the WMD issue and the war in Iraq. The last inquiry was the only one critical of what Blair did (with some help from Bush).

Hundreds of people with a clearance studied the subject matter. If you believe that hundreds of dedicated patriots would lie about who attacked our country, then I don't know what to say to you. IMO, if that's what you're saying, then you are beyond reach; lost in La La Land. because that is quite different than stove piping intelligence on Iraq WMD.

You know those standardize tests that assess aptitude? They have questions like this:
Apple is to fruit as blue is to
a) brick
b) hospital
c) color
d) car repair

I feel like a lot of people here would pick something other than 'c' (color). There's too much forced and false inference that if there is a conspiracy involving one category of activity, then there must be one around another category that is actually neither the same nor closely related.

Another error in thinking is assuming current guilt because of prior guilt. This error is compounded by assigning guilt to all members, past, present and future, of a highly compartmentalized organization based on the behaviors of few.

So b/c MK Ultra we just have to believe CIA pedophile rings and pizza gate. Or Iraqi WMD scam, so 9/11 was an "insider job" That sort of thing.

This is neither good science, nor acceptable criminal justice procedure.

Furthermore, the same "logic"applied to the targets of CTs isn't applied to the sources that CTists use to support their theories. Youtube guy/Podcast guy is always correct if he is a CTist, even though there are a gazillion examples of YouTube/Podcast guys being materially wrong and sometimes just plain lying.
 
Last edited:
Hundreds of people with a clearance studied the subject matter. If you believe that hundreds of dedicated patriots would lie about who attacked our country, then I don't know what to say to you. IMO, if that's what you're saying, then you are beyond reach; lost in La La Land.

That is quite different than stove piping intelligence on Iraq WMD.

You know those standardize tests that assess aptitude? They have questions like this:
Apple is to fruit as blue is to
a) brick
b) hospital
c) color
d) car repair

I feel like a lot of people here would pick something other than 'c' (color). There's too much forced and false inference that if there is a conspiracy involving one category of activity, then there must be one around another category that is actually neither the same nor closely related.
I get the feeling that you think conspiracy theorists pose a threat, such as undermining scientific inquiry, discourse, or debate..
While of course it's possible, I believe to be far greater the threat of stifling conspiracy theorists, because it goes hand in hand with authoritarianism.
I think the point you're missing is that Most conspiracy theorists genuinely hold their theories as theories. Their passion (which I believe you mistake for hubris) lies more in the foundation of keeping the fuckery-o-meter fired up wherever the "official story" hasn't gotten to the bottom of any given unresolved conspiracy. You mistake this by assuming that CT enthusiasts hold their theories as facts. They don't.

They get triggered when you say "case closed" .. cuz it's not.
You get triggered when they say "bull shit"... because you identify with the extent of effort/expertise which was expended.

I apologize for accusing you of attacking strawmen. Because that implies you're knowingly changing the subject. It would be better to say that we (You and I or CT's) aren't really even arguing against each other.

You're mad that CT's don't focus on existing results expert inquiry.
CT's are mad that smart people like you have moved on when the bulk of the fuckery remains to be explained.
These two do not contradict.
 
I get the feeling that you think conspiracy theorists pose a threat, such as undermining scientific inquiry, discourse, or debate..
While of course it's possible, I believe to be far greater the threat of stifling conspiracy theorists, because it goes hand in hand with authoritarianism.
I think the point you're missing is that Most conspiracy theorists genuinely hold their theories as theories. Their passion (which I believe you mistake for hubris) lies more in the foundation of keeping the fuckery-o-meter fired up wherever the "official story" hasn't gotten to the bottom of any given unresolved conspiracy. You mistake this by assuming that CT enthusiasts hold their theories as facts. They don't.

They get triggered when you say "case closed" .. cuz it's not.
You get triggered when they say "bull shit"... because you identify with the extent of effort/expertise which was expended.

I apologize for accusing you of attacking strawmen. Because that implies you're knowingly changing the subject. It would be better to say that we (You and I or CT's) aren't really even arguing against each other.

You're mad that CT's don't focus on existing results expert inquiry.
CT's are mad that smart people like you have moved on when the bulk of the fuckery remains to be explained.
These two do not contradict.

Hi Robbedigital.

I object to CTs because they do indeed call into question legitimate areas of inquiry. As I have said, they smear all those who are interested in deeper questions and deeper topics. The CTists have no sense of discretion.

Furthermore, they undermine our society, which is a very bad thing. When we have no faith and are thus weakened, we are open to attack and conquest by powers that are going to be very unpleasant for you to live under. The history of civilization is building up a society and then the tearing down by invaders. Since the A-bomb and US military might, the conquest has increasingly been in the realm of the mind and ideology as barbarians are unable to physically attack a coherent militarily strong society in an all out invasion.

Finally, I feel "slimed" every time I spend too much time here or reading other CTfused sources. I searched myself to understand why. I concluded it is that CTs are a lot of negative energy. It feels, in my heart, like a spiritual and psychological sickness. So much energy focussed on imaging horrible and pervasive evils everywhere. That is the "passion" that you refer to. It seems misplaced to me. There is so much that is positive and wonderful to be passionate about, why waste that energy on CTs?

On that latter point, a CTist might respond that I just can't handle the ugly reality of the situation. I don't think that's true. In fact, I have stared enough evil and ugliness in the face that I'm sure that is not what is at issue.

As far as case closed, there are only so many hours in a day, so many $s in a budget. Discretion is the key.
 
Last edited:
I think the point you're missing is that Most conspiracy theorists genuinely hold their theories as theories.
You mistake this by assuming that CT enthusiasts hold their theories as facts. They don't.
I can't see how any objective reader of these forums over the past couple of years would agree with your assessment above.

The language used here is often "just so" and no where near the tone one would use for a "theory".

Eric, who's taken the mantle for many more silent and even absent community members (who have moved on because of the focus on conspiracies), is more than open to questioning official narratives. He's done so repeatedly. While I'm cast in the lot of "mainstream apologists", this actually couldn't be farther from the truth. I know, similarly to Eric, that human beings are often (too often I'm afraid) "bad actors" and that folks of all sorts "conspire" with regularity. This certainly can happen at larger, more impactful scales.

I think the disconnect goes back to the point I am contending at the opening of this post: theories are valuable and ask us to consider things outside the norm and/or contrary to our biases; however presenting many of these conspiracies as proven/factual/actual is another animal all together.
 
First, I want to point out that I have never taken much of an interest in 9/11 issues, yet you are hammering me as if I were a prominent proponent. By doing that you force me to analyse if what you are saying is completely coherent. You seem to want to whip up my less that fulsome response to your ideas into something more than it is.

Hundreds of people with a clearance studied the subject matter. If you believe that hundreds of dedicated patriots would lie about who attacked our country, then I don't know what to say to you.

Well I suppose it would depend on the details. At the moment there are any number of people in the Judicial system, the Senate and Congress who seem to want to attack and destroy your country. Who knows if some of those idiots were around back then.

Indeed, there were plenty of people back then who were ready to throw caution to the wind and attack Iraq for what happened on 9/11. We both know how that turned out.

David
 
Back
Top