I am sorry that conspiracy theorists cause you distress, davidf.

My own view is that they are relatively harmless.

Yes, I know they spout off a whole lot of paranoid stuff, and that can be very confronting sometimes, especially if you find yourself as a target of that particular theory's hate. But for the theorist - here, at least - it is more likely to be a kind of vicarious association, rather than a full-blown "commitment to action".

There are of course some who make a full-time career out of it - I would imagine that there are a fair few 9/11 fantasists who are laughing all the way to the bank - but most are simply using it as a form of recreation. A means to bring some form of excitement and challenge into their lives.

The lot we have here on OLO appear to be in the latter category.

Their predominant mode seems to be self-promotion. The controversial nature of their "challenges to Authority" no doubt makes them feel just a little more important than they would see themselves to be, sans conspiracy.

The stock-in-trade of the conspiracy theorist is to exaggerate the power of "the Man", to a point where literally nothing is impossible. They have infinite resources, and command total loyalty from those "inside". Once convinced that these people exists, it is easy to imagine that a) they have organized themselves, b) that their aim is world domination and c) that everything that happens in the world is actually a manifestation of these folk at work.

The fact that there is no evidence to support this is, of course, convincing evidence to them, that it has been covered up.

So don't worry too much about them. They are more a modern social phenomenon than a threat.

To anyone, that is, but themselves.

As you point out, denying them the platform from which to expound their "theories" is not going to stop them. We should keep them out in the open where we can see them, and expose their ideas to as much daylight as possible.

So don't worry too much about them. They are more a modern social phenomenon than a threat.

To anyone, that is, but themselves.

As you point out, denying them the platform from which to expound their "theories" is not going to stop them. We should keep them out in the open where we can see them, and expose their ideas to as much daylight as possible.

--

with respect IMHO you are talking to a good old soap box spruker rather than a true CTheorist, who tend to keep their ideas to themselves unless asked, AND their theories are based on "logic as to fact" rather than hearay "evidence"

The big difference between myself and the so called tinfoil A grade conspiracy theorists,is that I've made the effort to meet professionals like Professor Steven Jones a well repected physicist,who knows the reality.Also the Australian Dr Frank Legge ( just google journal of 911 studies) who was on Prof Neils Harrit's team positively proving the existance of nano thermite in all the dust and debris of WTC buildings.I also met the founder if Architects and Engineers for 911 truth Richard Gage.There were many professionals at the two day international conference held in Sydney in Nov last year.

Thanks to the censorship of our media ,there were only 250 in the audience.In New Zealand where it went to the media,it was booked out with 600 turning up.They are all people of high intellect and integrity.

Aside from this,anyone with half a brain and knowledege of building structures knows that WTC 7 the third building which no plane impacted, was a controlled demolition.The evidence is sound and unambigious.

If one building was wired for controlled demolition,then so were the others.So place your bets.I spoke to the aeronautical engineer John Bursill recently and he still is offering $100,000.00 for anyone who can disprove the science.Why are there no takers?

I'm sure we've had this conversation before, Arjay.

>>So place your bets.I spoke to the aeronautical engineer John Bursill recently and he still is offering $100,000.00 for anyone who can disprove the science.Why are there no takers?<<

The reason there are no takers is simply that the "offer" lacks a few details.

The most obvious being not only who decides what constitutes disproof, but what exactly needs to be disproved.

If it is going to be just another situation where one side says "those puffs of smoke prove there were explosives", and the other says "they're just puffs of smoke", we are not going to get much further.

So by all means point us to the web site where this bet may be placed. If it is on the level, I'll be willing to take a punt. Along with many others, I suspect.

I also recall you were putting up some money yourself, Arjay.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3509#83997

What happened to that?

OK.Pericles start debunking the the science of freefall of WTC 7 postulated by Prof David Chandler. http://ae911truth.org/

KYOTO IS MARXISM IN DRAG.....

Yep.. In my view. Call it a conspiracy of the UN or of powerful figures connected to it (including MAURICE STRONG who designed "kyoto")

Let's look at what Marxism is about (in short) "Income redistribution"

FROM the Wealthy TO the poor...by legislation.

Abolition of private property and much much more.

KYOTO is brainchild of Strong, and the main 'instruments' include

a) Carbon TRADING (which makes STRONG an even richer capitalist than he already is.. he is a director of the CCX .. a ten trillion dollar industry)

b) The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in DEVELOPING countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets.

Does it occur to any of you Einstiens out there, that if WE are the polluters.. we should be focusing our 'offset' activity in OUR backyard for OUR benefit (and by default, the worlds)

DEVELOPING countries is STRONGs socialism coming through.

Remember this bloke is a "CROOK" like Nixon! Insider trader.. sharleton.. opportunist and wealth creator for left wing causes..mainly HIS.

I hope the penny is dropping now about why I started a thread on STRONG.

I can't wait for the utterly deluded Greenies to explain how STRONG being a director of the multi billion dollar making CCX is in fact "out of the sincerity of his heart, and for the well being of the world"..while at the same time having a track record of promoting causes he has SHARES IN...and then when things look bad SELLING them for HUGE profits as an inside trader or is it 'traitor'?

The documentation for the law suit which followed is on the Maurice Strong thread.