You’re very welcome!
Indeed.
I’ve always thought the strongest argument against such conspiracies is, as he says, that if they are as powerful as they are made out to be – controlling governments and manipulating economies – surely they could silence YouTube videos that expose their grand plans.
BJH,
As you know, I’ve cut back my time on the Forum.
So, I’m responding to you from memory because I cannot afford to spend a lot of time on this.
I put in my cancellation for membership renewal about 2 or 3 weeks ago.
What I remember is I was discussing something with ChatGPT.
Chat GPT had already acknowledged that institutions have chosen to be silent on certain facts.
I said something and Robert and what’s his name said something.
Then I said something.
Then what’s his name said prove him wrong and Robert said ask ChatGPT what he thought of the person being interviewed.
Meanwhile I knew ChatGPT admitted I was right.
Oh, that’s what it was: what’s his name (not Stephen) said something and I brought up 9/11 because sometimes Large Language Models will give you the “official explanation” but the official explanation is a cover-up.
So, the point being illustrated is smart people have to deal with ambiguity.
One cannot just pose a question to AI without being ready to call AI on nonsense.
Case in point was PBS-Nova “How the Towers Fell” and the 9/11 Commission report.
What’s his name and Stephen said something that would lead to the inference that every picture of giant skeletons and living giants worldwide (before 1910) were faked and could not be used as proof even though the Smithsonian admits to having catalogued skeletons of giants.
So, I was arguing against institutional cover-ups.
I waited as long as I could for Robert or anybody to refute the position how the towers fell, including Bldg 7 but I didn’t see anything. The presentation in the Redacted interview was excellent.
Gotta go.
Since we are no loner discussing Nephilim, I have a story to share.
Once–embarrassingly far into my adulthood–I decided to find out what 9/11 Truthers were on about. I had been aware they existed, but I’d never paid them much mind–I’d just written them off as loons in the same category as Flat-Earthers.
So I started watching Truther Youtube videos. I found them intriguing, and eventually convincing. These weren’t the raving imbeciles I’d expected.
Before I knew it, I found that I was convinced by their evidence.
There was just too much that didn’t add up: Jet fuel can’t melt steel. Skyscrapers are designed to withstand an airplane strike (and much older and less sophisticated skyscrapers *have* withstood airliner strikes). A collapsing building won’t collapse on itself at freefall rates. Etc.
For roughly 24 hours, I was fully convinced there had been a cover-up.
Then I watched a video of the South Tower collapse where you could see the South Tower supports bowing several seconds before it finally buckled and collapsed. That didn’t fit the controlled demolition story. And it called into question the idea that the fire couldn’t have jeopardize the steel structure. It forced me to take a step back. It was exactly what the official story said happened, and precisely not what the controlled demolition story said happened.
Once I was forced to take that step back and reevaluate, once I started actually paying attention to the rebuttals of Truthers, I found convincing answers to the problems that had previously convinced me that the Truthers were right.
The whole thing was a very interesting, and disconcerting, experience of how easy it is to be duped.
Unfortunately, during my one day of being a Truther I convinced my wife, and she convinced a friend, and that friend is still a committed truther.
Porphyry said
… Once–embarrassingly far into my adulthood …
You’re still a very young man, so don’t be too embarrassed.
<blockquote>For roughly 24 hours, I was fully convinced there had been a cover-up.</blockquote>
Was there also a theory regarding the original purpose of this conspiracy?
<blockquote>… and she convinced a friend, and that friend is still a committed truther.</blockquote>I wonder why this friend not persuaded by the evidence that had convinced you to abandon the truther claims?
Was there also a theory regarding the original purpose of this conspiracy?
I was unsure of the motive. I didn’t buy the common conspiracies. My tendency was to think there was some giant cock-up and a subsequent coverup (i.e., more incompetence than malice), but I hadn’t worked out the pieces before I was disabused of the whole theory.
I wonder why this friend not persuaded by the evidence that had convinced you to abandon the truther claims?
I’m not sure. My wife was the primary contact.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)