Sandy Hook - the Conspiracy (with video)

[Hero in a half shell]

snip

The argument was that the government is too stupid to pull it off, which it clearly isnt. Not about whether it pulled this particular thing, which it quite obviuosly didnt do.
Your moral obligation leakage would hold if not two things:
1. you assume morality is universaly identical. It is not. There are people whos morality does not have problems with killing children, despite how much disgusting it sounds to you.
2. Government has done it before. They admited to it 40 years later. Not direct killing, but experiments with civilians without thier knowledge. Agent Orange it was called. There were whistleblowers. Government denied it. They were called conspiracy theorists and showed out of society.

You make good argument about fame of such whistleblower now as we tend to glorify them nowadays so the situation may have shifted slightly. But it really is just speculation considering that most news outlet is actually owned by same few people because thats how rampant capitalism ends up.

The big conspiracies that we didnt heard about... we still didnt hear about. You know how they say that US military technology is 20 years ahead of civilian level? Do we know about such tecnology? No, becasue they sucesfully hide it.

I had a big sprawling comment laid out, and I lost it all when I accidentally refreshed the page, I cannot be bothered to try and write it again, so I'll just say that morality in cases such as Sandy Hook would be relevant since it's the general public: Medics, teachers, parents, construction workers: lots of people that are outside of the conspiracy being asked to keep it a secret for reasons they will not benefit from. Not only is the likelihood extremely high of someone breaking silence due to conscience or fame, but the knowledge for the conspirators that this is an extremely likely outcome would mean they couldn't risk such an act getting out over such a weak payoff (a short discussion about gun control that achieved nothing.)

Whistleblowers have been listened to, your example of the Agent Orange whistleblower (Dr. Bob Bowman) was listened to, that's why he's called the Agent Orange Whistleblower: He wrote a very well respected book about it at the time and everything.
Other recent broken conspiracies have all been whistleblowers that were listened to, not ignored: The Suez Crisis, Watergate, Wikileaks and now the NSA scandal: All single men talking that took down empires. They were listened to, not shunned.

Finally the point about military tech, we do know what it is, F-22 Raptors, Predator Drones, M1A2 Abrams Battle tanks, Nuclear Submarines, Cruise Missiles, even the not yet operational tech like Navy lasers. We know these exist, we know their specifications, speed, damage, weight, range etc.
What we do not know are the exact ways they work: how exactly they function, but everything else is common knowledge, whether the military want it to be or not.

 

[Something Amyss]

One only needs to look at scientific community and how it treats ideas that goes against the status quo to see this. I mean heck the Russian meteorite was announced several times but was ignored as conspiracy.

[citation needed]

Seriously, back it up.

No. What i am saying is that government is capable of highly orchestrated large scale secret projects resulting in no leaks, therefore you cant just write stuff off as "lol government is stupid".

And you're doing so by comparing apples to oranges. That seems...Dishonest.

On a personal note, my elevator was out of service for seven weeks after the repairs required were expected to take two. Is this a conspiracy, inept workers, or just unforeseen circumstances? when it comes to simple construction....

On the contrary, i am arguing that the definition of conspiracy theory has shifted in the eyes of public.

and you've failed to make a compelling argument, if that's the case.

If their arguments are illogical, show the faults in thier logic, not start calling them names and hate them before even hearing the arguments. Whether their opinion is correct or not they still have a right to have it. There is a thing called freedom of speech that allows them to have their opinions.

That same freedom of speech allows someone to call people "fucking morons." You can't play it one way. If they get to speak, so does he.

But beyond that. Reasoning with CTs doesn't work. That's why two different kinds of birth certificate have shut the birthers up, why physics hasn't shut the truthers up, why the flat earthers can still believe in a flat earth, why geocentrists have come up with a whole new set of "physics" to explain properties in the night sky that seemingly defy their logic.

Hell, I'm wondering if you're going to cleave to this notion that a government building a bomb shelter is on par with orchestrating a public killing spree.

Taken from posting guildelines:
Don't Be a Jerk:
Flaming
Calling people names (or groups who may visit The Escapist), this includes calling others a troll
Rants
You can disagree with whatever you like but using large amounts of obscene language and CAPS is against our policies. We are sure you can find another way to voice your opinion without being aggressive, regardless of whom it is directed at.

See, you're not arguing free speech. You're arguing the Escapists terms. Which are not free speech. And you know what? I'm fine with them, I'm not criticisng them, but you can't say "free speech!" when you're talking about these rules.

Also, you know what the Escapist says you're supposed to do? Mark it and move on. If you think he's a problem and you support the rules of the Escapist forum, stop, mark, forget it.

The argument was that the government is too stupid to pull it off, which it clearly isnt.

You haven't made an argument capable of demonstrating that, though. Nobody's going to bat their eye at a bomb shelter. and by "nobody" I mean in the colloquial sense of "for all intents and purposes." Would you even care if you weren't trawling for examples to support your case?

Would the people who were behind this have the same imperative to come clean? Would people be sufficiently insulated that they wouldn't put two and two together after the fact? Would people be as disgusted by the construction of a bomb shelter as they were by the murder of children?

I think not on all counts. But you brought up the example, prove why it's the case.

The big conspiracies that we didnt heard about... we still didnt hear about.

That's not a compelling argument. If we didn't hear about them, they don't stand as evidence.

You know how they say that US military technology is 20 years ahead of civilian level?

You know how they say bumblebee flight violates the laws of aerodynamics?

Both are patently false.

"They say" a lot of things. At best, "20 years" is an optimistic and ass-pulled approximation, which would have to be an aggregate in the first place. And at best, "they" could only guess because "it's a secret." History doesn't bear this out, though.

I gotta say. Between the ages of 19 and 23, I worked for multiple companies that did government contracting and contracting to NASA. Before I developed health problems that made my hands shake, I was an electronics and fiber optics technician. A lot of the secrets aren't about the technology being advanced trade secrets, but about how it's being used and in how it's being built. But then, I was technically working for the government (though other groups were my employers) and I signed NDAs, so maybe I'm in on it? I don't know. Apparently, both those facts are damning evidence.

Hell, even then, the US Government might have built a death ray and people working on the coarse points wouldn't know it. But then, unlike school shootings, death rays don't trace back to a specific locale so readily. So the only way there would be a parallel is if you think a death ray and a bomb shelter would draw similar responses.

Or maybe none of these things aren't exactly as sinister as people make them out to be.

Just because someone describes something as "very odd" that doesn't make it so.

It is, however, how this sort of thing spreads.

Their was a town vote on it and everything. Look it up.

Which circles back round to the beginning of this post: why this conspiracy would be a logistical nightmare. The whole town appears to be in on it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Finally the point about military tech, we do know what it is, F-22 Raptors, Predator Drones, M1A2 Abrams Battle tanks, Nuclear Submarines, Cruise Missiles, even the not yet operational tech like Navy lasers. We know these exist, we know their specifications, speed, damage, weight, range etc.
What we do not know are the exact ways they work: how exactly they function, but everything else is common knowledge, whether the military want it to be or not.

Those aren't necessarily 20 years ahead of our time, though. That's part of the problem with his claim. Civilians are unlikely to get cruise missiles in any realistic timeframe, or military-grade lasers. Hell, I was in school for this sort of thing fiften years ago and the lasers restricted then are pretty much the same. Some things will always be military, law enforcement, industrial, or medical-only.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

One only needs to look at scientific community and how it treats ideas that goes against the status quo to see this. I mean heck the Russian meteorite was announced several times but was ignored as conspiracy.

Sorry but theres a reason for this. This line makes my blood boil because its usually always deployed by creationists or other pseudoscientists (like homeopaths) to try and discredit the scientific community. I, like this other person, also harbour a very deep intense loathing (I wouldnt go as far as hate) to the aforementioned groups (particularly creationists and "spiritual healers"). Its GOOD the scientific community is brutal and critical of new ideas. Its why the drugs you take have been tested over and over to ensure they dont kill you. When the scientific community stops treating new ideas with no evidence like dog crap we get the thalidomide scenario. The point of science is EVERY other scientist in the field should be able to shred your idea and your idea should still stand up. Youre either on the side of the line where your idea falls apart and youre wrong or it survives the ruthless shredding and youre a genius. Hell even darwin understood this. When you bring an idea to the table it NEEDS a lot of evidence. And even if you have it you stand and face the shredding anyway because thats the barrier for entry for ideas that are important enough to decide the fate of other human lives (Im talking from a medical perspective here).

What youve described is called scepticism. Its the reason the medicine you take is well founded and functional. Youre welcome. Trust me you dont WANT us to be too open minded when it comes to accepting new ideas in science. If we were we would have more thalidomide debacles and maybe youd be the one who ends up dead. You enter the arena you face the gladiators, every well established scientist knows this and so should conspiracy theorists. Maybe its adversarial, maybe its scary. Its the barrier we impose to stop any jackass with a basic education trying to pass off hastily formulated drugs as real medicine. Its the thing between you and appalling corner cutting in drug production. Its your shield and id suggest not being so hostile and dismissive toward it.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

Yeah, just going to put this here:

Spoiler

I notice the person who created the documentary also has one on chemtrails, and according to the comments seems to be championing every conspiracies this side of ancient aliens guy. I would be very careful in double checking the sources of anything this video claimed, and maybe getting several dozen second opinions.

I don't buy the Ancient Aliens stuff, but on chemtrails there is actual government documentation on plans for exploring weather modification. The below is from 1966.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents/19680002906_1968002906.pdf

Certainly, weather modification is nothing new. There's even a treaty limiting its use.

However, there's a big difference between that and every fast moving flying thing in the entire world being fitting with mind control chemicals.

I'm going to add to that video with this:


Potholer has some of the best videos on how to filter bullshit. Much of his videos are debunking Creationists (and making a mockery of them) but some of them deal with conspiracies (including Global Warming Denials).

OP: I'm not going to bother watching this video. I'm in no mood for 90 minutes of paranoid insanity.

But can someone give me the gist of it? What is the "Theory" to this conspiracy? Government cover up? Aliens? Lizardmen? The Gay Mafia? Atheists Stealing Christmas?

 

[ChaosReaver]

I notice the person who created the documentary also has one on chemtrails, and according to the comments seems to be championing every conspiracies this side of ancient aliens guy. I would be very careful in double checking the sources of anything this video claimed, and maybe getting several dozen second opinions.

I don't buy the Ancient Aliens stuff, but on chemtrails there is actual government documentation on plans for exploring weather modification. The below is from 1966.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents/19680002906_1968002906.pdf

Those aren't dangerous though. Its essentially using particulate matter naturally found in the air to form clouds, which will provide rainfall. This is a thing to combat droughts.

 

[Something Amyss]

Potholer has some of the best videos on how to filter bullshit. Much of his videos are debunking Creationists (and making a mockery of them) but some of them deal with conspiracies (including Global Warming Denials).

Potholer is indeed awesome. And most of what he does is relatively straightforward. Doing things like looking for the origin of a claim, for example.

But can someone give me the gist of it? What is the "Theory" to this conspiracy? Government cover up? Aliens? Lizardmen? The Gay Mafia? Atheists Stealing Christmas?

Hey, hey, hey! You're going to ruin the gay mafia/Atheist Christmas theft allience!

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Finally the point about military tech, we do know what it is, F-22 Raptors, Predator Drones, M1A2 Abrams Battle tanks, Nuclear Submarines, Cruise Missiles, even the not yet operational tech like Navy lasers. We know these exist, we know their specifications, speed, damage, weight, range etc.
What we do not know are the exact ways they work: how exactly they function, but everything else is common knowledge, whether the military want it to be or not.

Those aren't necessarily 20 years ahead of our time, though. That's part of the problem with his claim. Civilians are unlikely to get cruise missiles in any realistic timeframe, or military-grade lasers. Hell, I was in school for this sort of thing fiften years ago and the lasers restricted then are pretty much the same. Some things will always be military, law enforcement, industrial, or medical-only.

Of course as much as I want it I'm not allowed to buy an M1A2 Abrams battle tank, but the point is that we know what technology the military are using. We know what they are deploying, and in many cases, planning on deploying. In the context of conspiracy theories this is supposed to show that the government isn't run on secrets and conspiracies. Actually a lot of what you see is what you get, most backroom deals don't go deeper than 2 or 3 people agreeing to compromise on one issue now, so they can be given a bigger budget or more responsibility tomorrow.
In this context secrets are really hard to keep, and if it's a highly incriminating scenario like organising an imaginary school shooting that will involve dozens of parties outside of the government, then that's pretty much impossible without someone blowing the lid off it.

 

[kurokotetsu]

that black matter exists

I will assume you mean Dark Matter, and no, there is no direct evidence of Dark Matter, only inferred from other effects. That's why it's called Dark Matter. It's short hand for "no fucking idea what this is"

You are right that i was rather unspecific here. I believe the technical term now is antimatter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

NO IT IS NOT THE SAME THING! Really, anitmatter has been observed. Damn, we use it in medicine already, in a little thing called PET. Dark matter in another hand hasn't been observed, nobody understands it and we only have hypothesis about it. Two completely different things. ANd even without haivn an idea you talk about how closed the scientific community is. You get a:

Spoiler

There is little to add. Conspiracy is a hard thing to prove, most are really small scales and this tragedy is being trivilized by the poeple raving like crazy about these things.

 

[Strazdas]

wow this thread exploded fast.

You are right that i was rather unspecific here. I believe the technical term now is antimatter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

No, it's not. We more or less completely understand what antimatter is now. We can create infinitesimal amounts of it in a controlled environment. Dark matter, on the other hand, has only been hypothesized, never proven. Just had to clear that up.

Precisely my point. Something that we now know exists, we can create it, was a conspiracy theory before.

I had a big sprawling comment laid out, and I lost it all when I accidentally refreshed the page, I cannot be bothered to try and write it again, so I'll just say that morality in cases such as Sandy Hook would be relevant since it's the general public: Medics, teachers, parents, construction workers: lots of people that are outside of the conspiracy being asked to keep it a secret for reasons they will not benefit from. Not only is the likelihood extremely high of someone breaking silence due to conscience or fame, but the knowledge for the conspirators that this is an extremely likely outcome would mean they couldn't risk such an act getting out over such a weak payoff (a short discussion about gun control that achieved nothing.)

Whistleblowers have been listened to, your example of the Agent Orange whistleblower (Dr. Bob Bowman) was listened to, that's why he's called the Agent Orange Whistleblower: He wrote a very well respected book about it at the time and everything.
Other recent broken conspiracies have all been whistleblowers that were listened to, not ignored: The Suez Crisis, Watergate, Wikileaks and now the NSA scandal: All single men talking that took down empires. They were listened to, not shunned.

Finally the point about military tech, we do know what it is, F-22 Raptors, Predator Drones, M1A2 Abrams Battle tanks, Nuclear Submarines, Cruise Missiles, even the not yet operational tech like Navy lasers. We know these exist, we know their specifications, speed, damage, weight, range etc.
What we do not know are the exact ways they work: how exactly they function, but everything else is common knowledge, whether the military want it to be or not.

Yeah it happens. Sucks that you can just press back and get your comment back in.
you do have a point with morality becoming harder when you are sampling random people, which very likely it would have been here. I never said Sandy Hook was a conspiracy though, merely that conspiracy on that level is possible. And if you are making one of those you are picking people that wont blow it for moral reasons (at least as best you can). The main problem is that people think everyone must be in on it. this is false. only the key personnel need that. Most of the rest wont ever even see the thing.
bob Bowman wasnt listened to though. Even after the government admited they did it people still didnt believe it. He did wrote a well respected book on it, though im not sure about timing but i wont argue you there.
Wikipeaks and NSA scandal has done pretty much nothing but created new anecdotes really. they exposed some things. nothing was really done to change that. NSA can still legally spy on you (no matter how much german president is "saddened"). and the war continues to go on its course. Whistleblowers get famouse for 5 minutes and then everyone ignore it. And im not even going into the group of people who claimed it was fake.

No. we know what they had for a while yet and are confident enough to use it. We have connercial drones now. True however that during war the gap is lower as war is quite a public testing grounds. There were leaks of a workign exoskeleton, public remaining unaware. there were experiments on sleep removal (synthetically stimulating brain to stop needing sleep, thought little is know about this project that can be confirmed), yet the public is obvliviuos. Nuclear submarines is a very old thing and even that one we found out years after they were built.
Intresting that you consider secret military projects common knowledge though.

Seriously, back it up.

I gave examples. i even quoted one of the responses in this very post.

That same freedom of speech allows someone to call people "fucking morons." You can't play it one way. If they get to speak, so does he.

No, it does not. Freedom of speech does not allow you to insult people.

But beyond that. Reasoning with CTs doesn't work. That's why two different kinds of birth certificate have shut the birthers up, why physics hasn't shut the truthers up, why the flat earthers can still believe in a flat earth, why geocentrists have come up with a whole new set of "physics" to explain properties in the night sky that seemingly defy their logic.

And hating them does?

See, you're not arguing free speech. You're arguing the Escapists terms. Which are not free speech. And you know what? I'm fine with them, I'm not criticisng them, but you can't say "free speech!" when you're talking about these rules.

Also, you know what the Escapist says you're supposed to do? Mark it and move on. If you think he's a problem and you support the rules of the Escapist forum, stop, mark, forget it.

The part of my response that you quoted for this dealt exclusively with him saying he wants to rant and insult in this post and thats why he came here, therefore i responded by showing him it is agianst posting guidelines.
I do not do neither.

As for the rest of your quote I really ahve no energy to quite it all now so illjust leave it as "you make a fair argument".

snip for medicine post

I think you misunderstood me. I got no problem with scientific scrutiny. I was referring to cases where they were not even willing to listen to the proposal before writing it off as "conspiracy".

ticket from science police

sigh. you have misunderstood me. I was correcting myself from saying "black matter" to what i actually meant to say - antimatter.

 

[Dansen]

All told, this is one of the easiest conspiracy claims to dismiss that I've ever seen.

The unfortunate thing is that it'll stop nobody from continuing such claims.

Still you got to admit it could be the plot point for an interesting sci-fi show. In order to cover up a disasterous alien/supernatural encounter the government uses a school shooting as a pretext to get rid of all the evidence in one large swoop. If I ever go into writing maybe I should use conspiracy theories for insparation...

 

[Hero in a half shell]

wow this thread exploded fast.

...
Yeah it happens. Sucks that you can just press back and get your comment back in.
you do have a point with morality becoming harder when you are sampling random people, which very likely it would have been here. I never said Sandy Hook was a conspiracy though, merely that conspiracy on that level is possible. And if you are making one of those you are picking people that wont blow it for moral reasons (at least as best you can). The main problem is that people think everyone must be in on it. this is false. only the key personnel need that. Most of the rest wont ever even see the thing.
bob Bowman wasnt listened to though. Even after the government admited they did it people still didnt believe it. He did wrote a well respected book on it, though im not sure about timing but i wont argue you there.
Wikipeaks and NSA scandal has done pretty much nothing but created new anecdotes really. they exposed some things. nothing was really done to change that. NSA can still legally spy on you (no matter how much german president is "saddened"). and the war continues to go on its course. Whistleblowers get famouse for 5 minutes and then everyone ignore it. And im not even going into the group of people who claimed it was fake.

No. we know what they had for a while yet and are confident enough to use it. We have connercial drones now. True however that during war the gap is lower as war is quite a public testing grounds. There were leaks of a workign exoskeleton, public remaining unaware. there were experiments on sleep removal (synthetically stimulating brain to stop needing sleep, thought little is know about this project that can be confirmed), yet the public is obvliviuos. Nuclear submarines is a very old thing and even that one we found out years after they were built.
Intresting that you consider secret military projects common knowledge though.

I feel honorbound to reply, although I'm not really sure what we are arguing about any more.

We both believe Sandy Hook wasn't a conspiracy, I'm just slightly more inclined to trust that any large similar conspiracy will get out due to whistleblowing/mistakes and you're under the belief that the government could possibly pull something of this scale off.

There are examples of conspiracies getting busted, and of them remaining secret until the government themselves revealed them under freedom of information or whatever. Arguing over the exact circumstances of each isn't really about the overall argument anymore, so I'll just agree to... agree that Sandy Hook wasn't a conspiracy, but obviously the US government have done shady crap before, and could again.

 

[nepheleim]

If you have the time to watch this video, please do and let me know what you think of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1yfJDCMU64

I would say to not focus on some of the wackier shit that this lady says (the Agenda 21 and 1st - 5th Dimensions stuff) but to focus more on the details like the analysis of the photographs, the people milling around the fire house, the age of the Sandy Hook parents, etc.



In general, I am not a conspiracy theorist, but the fact that this whole scenario played out and we never even got a picture of the outside of the school where Lanza allegedly shot his way in has always seemed fishy to me. Couple that with the fact that with Columbine we had video of Klebold walking around the school in his trench coat, etc and something just seems off.

Also consider they completely razed the school and the construction workers were forced to sign an NDA, which was very odd.

I'm probably most suspicious of Robbie Parker - something doesn't square with me about that guy.

Here you go: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/photo-galleries/2013/11/25/sandy-hook-massacre-evidence-photos/
Starting at picture 12 are the photos of the sandy hook entrance that got shot out. There are more exterior shots under that same url.
As for people milling around, it's already been said above. But go find a firefighter, or your local police, or CERT people after an emergency and they'll all tell you that panic makes people do weird things. Behavioral analysis of an immediate post-crisis individual won't tell you too much about that individual.
They did tear down the school to build a new one (allegedly, dunno if construction was ever started or finished).

 

[debtcollector]

Precisely my point. Something that we now know exists, we can create it, was a conspiracy theory before.

No, that's not the case. I'm not sure you know what a "conspiracy theory" is. Just because something is unproven does not make it a conspiracy theory. Take dark matter. There is scientific evidence that suggests that the universe should hold more mass than we have observed. Therefore, scientists have speculated that dark matter, an unobserved type of matter, makes up that remaining mass. This has the weight of scientific theory and a considerable amount of scientific fact behind it. We call these "hypotheses".

Conspiracy theories are backed up by no facts at all. Their proponents twist words, argue semantics, and prolong debates to distract from the absolute dearth of logic that forms the entirety of their arguments. They cannot be proven wrong, however, because they trust absolutely no outside evidence and will change their theories to fit whatever "facts" they claim to have discovered. They consistently claim they are "misunderstood" in order to reiterate their same tired points over and over again with slightly different language. Similarly, they consistently fail to back up their claims with any evidence at all (for example, providing sources claiming that the Russian meteorite was decried as a hoax). They misinterpret the meaning of "freedom of speech" to mean "freedom of any speech not hurtful to me". They claim to enjoy debate, but are incapable of rhetoric, instead ignoring their opponents' opinions to howl all the louder. They are, in short, indistinguishable from common trolls and cannot be taken seriously until such time as they provide sources for their claims and try to discuss them in a rational manner.

 

[nepheleim]

They are, in short, indistinguishable from common trolls and cannot be taken seriously until such time as they provide sources for their claims and try to discuss them in a rational manner.

Since research is a huge part of my life now, I find this same flaw present in mass media. Apparently God Himself will strike down the Senator, Representative, legislator, or journalist who actually cites his sources for me to check.

 

[Something Amyss]

Still you got to admit it could be the plot point for an interesting sci-fi show. In order to cover up a disasterous alien/supernatural encounter the government uses a school shooting as a pretext to get rid of all the evidence in one large swoop. If I ever go into writing maybe I should use conspiracy theories for insparation...

To be honest, I'm a fantasy/sci-fi author and I love to let my imagination run wild with this shit. I looooooove it. The thing is, at the end of the day, I can put it away as flights of fantasy, instead of demanding the government come clean.

I love to dream about a world of weird and creepy things. I'm caught between an analytic mind and an overactive imagination.

So yeah, I will totally admit it. XD

Precisely my point. Something that we now know exists, we can create it, was a conspiracy theory before.

Except it wasn't. there's a difference between "unproven" and "conspiracy theory."

I'm sorry you don't seem to get this, but that doesn't make it true.

There were leaks of a workign exoskeleton, public remaining unaware.

Not "leaks," news.

there were experiments on sleep removal (synthetically stimulating brain to stop needing sleep, thought little is know about this project that can be confirmed), yet the public is obvliviuos.

Except the information has been there for a long time. People not knowing about it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory, dude. The average person doesn't know how nuclear power works, either. Doesn't make it a conspiracy.

I gave examples. i even quoted one of the responses in this very post.

You've failed to demonstrate the meteroite was labelled a conspiracy theory by the scientific community. Should I take this dodge as concession?

No, it does not. Freedom of speech does not allow you to insult people.

Err...Yes it does. Demonstrate, concretely otherwise.

And hating them does?

I didn't say that. I merely pointed out what was wrong with your statement.

The part of my response that you quoted for this dealt exclusively with him saying he wants to rant and insult in this post and thats why he came here, therefore i responded by showing him it is agianst posting guidelines.

While making free speech claims.

I think you misunderstood me. I got no problem with scientific scrutiny. I was referring to cases where they were not even willing to listen to the proposal before writing it off as "conspiracy".

Again, prove it. You listed a specific example of the scientific community calling something a conspiracy theory. Give some actual examples.

As for people milling around, it's already been said above. But go find a firefighter, or your local police, or CERT people after an emergency and they'll all tell you that panic makes people do weird things. Behavioral analysis of an immediate post-crisis individual won't tell you too much about that individual.

Hell, go talk to someone who's lost a loved one.

When my grandfather died, my grandmother spoke to me like she was reporting the weather. Now, part of me was mad at the time. I was mad that she wasn't more upset. But that doesn't mean my grandfather is still alive, or he was murdered instead of dying from stroke complications. I went numb when my uncle died, because we were so often compared. I knew people who lived close enough to ground zero to scare the shit out of me, and I just bottled it up for two days. One of them had to get part of a passenger seat removed from their building before it was deemed safe to get their stuff. I didn't know this, with all the panic going on, they could have been dead.

Yeah.

Which makes me wonder if these people have ever lost someone before, of if they're truly that isolated.

 

[Strazdas]

and you're under the belief that the government could possibly pull something of this scale off.
but obviously the US government have done shady crap before, and could again.

Which is all i was arguing for - the government being capable of committing conspiracy (opposed to how most people wrote government as automatically too stupid)

No, that's not the case. I'm not sure you know what a "conspiracy theory" is. Just because something is unproven does not make it a conspiracy theory. Take dark matter. There is scientific evidence that suggests that the universe should hold more mass than we have observed. Therefore, scientists have speculated that dark matter, an unobserved type of matter, makes up that remaining mass. This has the weight of scientific theory and a considerable amount of scientific fact behind it. We call these "hypotheses".

Conspiracy theories are backed up by no facts at all. Their proponents twist words, argue semantics, and prolong debates to distract from the absolute dearth of logic that forms the entirety of their arguments. They cannot be proven wrong, however, because they trust absolutely no outside evidence and will change their theories to fit whatever "facts" they claim to have discovered. They consistently claim they are "misunderstood" in order to reiterate their same tired points over and over again with slightly different language. Similarly, they consistently fail to back up their claims with any evidence at all (for example, providing sources claiming that the Russian meteorite was decried as a hoax). They misinterpret the meaning of "freedom of speech" to mean "freedom of any speech not hurtful to me". They claim to enjoy debate, but are incapable of rhetoric, instead ignoring their opponents' opinions to howl all the louder. They are, in short, indistinguishable from common trolls and cannot be taken seriously until such time as they provide sources for their claims and try to discuss them in a rational manner.

I didnt say antimatter was a conspiracy. I said it was called a conspiracy.
wikipedia claims "A conspiracy theory is an explanatory proposition that accuses two or more people, a group, or an organization of having caused or covered up, through deliberate collusion, an event or phenomenon of great social, political, or economic impact. In recent decades the term has acquired a derogatory meaning, and a careful distinction must be made between the derisive use of the term and reference to actual, proven conspiracies."
Nothing is said about providing or not providing proof.

Not "leaks," news.

"News" have shown a pretty poor and wired prototype. Leaks have shown one that is self-sufficient to a point. Leaks were called a hoax by the military.

Except the information has been there for a long time. People not knowing about it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory, dude. The average person doesn't know how nuclear power works, either. Doesn't make it a conspiracy.

It does not make it a conspiracy theory and yet people claim it is a conspiracy theory. Hence the term being changed.

You've failed to demonstrate the meteroite was labelled a conspiracy theory by the scientific community. Should I take this dodge as concession?

I never claimed that the meteorite was a conspiracy theory. We have been warned about it long ago though, by scientists, however other scientists have said that the claimant scientist is just a conspiracy nut and the asteroid will pass by earth. Turns out not both of the asteroids passed, one of them hit.

Err...Yes it does. Demonstrate, concretely otherwise.

So i did some research and you are correct in this. Mere insults are not beyond freedom of speech.

Give some actual examples.

Most of current physic theories before their recognition.

 

[BakedSardine]

Here you go: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/photo-galleries/2013/11/25/sandy-hook-massacre-evidence-photos/
Starting at picture 12 are the photos of the sandy hook entrance that got shot out. There are more exterior shots under that same url.
As for people milling around, it's already been said above. But go find a firefighter, or your local police, or CERT people after an emergency and they'll all tell you that panic makes people do weird things. Behavioral analysis of an immediate post-crisis individual won't tell you too much about that individual.
They did tear down the school to build a new one (allegedly, dunno if construction was ever started or finished).

Thanks - first I have seen these pics. When were they released?

 

[nepheleim]

Here you go: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/photo-galleries/2013/11/25/sandy-hook-massacre-evidence-photos/
Starting at picture 12 are the photos of the sandy hook entrance that got shot out. There are more exterior shots under that same url.
As for people milling around, it's already been said above. But go find a firefighter, or your local police, or CERT people after an emergency and they'll all tell you that panic makes people do weird things. Behavioral analysis of an immediate post-crisis individual won't tell you too much about that individual.
They did tear down the school to build a new one (allegedly, dunno if construction was ever started or finished).

Thanks - first I have seen these pics. When were they released?

Judging by the URL: 11-25-13
Probably the same time the final report was released, along with its myriad appendices.

 

[kurokotetsu]

ticket from science police

sigh. you have misunderstood me. I was correcting myself from saying "black matter" to what i actually meant to say - antimatter.

OK, you talk about Antimatter. OK. Can you provide a single quote of someone saying it was a conspiracy theory. A quote from Dirac accusing the scientific community of covering his discovery. Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg or Schrödinger calling him a conspiracy nut. Anyone at all claiming that any physical theory was a conspiracy theory. Just please produce a single reliable source of someone saying that antimatter was a conspiracy thoery. Or Relativity. Or QM. Or QED. Or the Standard Model. Or even unproven hypothesis with scientific recongition like String or Quantum Loop. Or someone talking down Maxwell, or Faraday, or even Newton. Or hell, produce a quote form someon calling another scientist "You are a conspiracy nut" from the recent Chelyablinsk meteor. Really. A single reliable quote. Because from my reitereited contact with physiscist and mathematicians, when being critical of other hypothesis, not a single one has clained it is a"conspiracy theory" in great part because IT IS NOT A THEORY to any scientist before it has been proven. SO probably the ticket stands, check your sources.