Home > daily complaint, expose, philosophy > Theory/Belief

Theory/Belief

“We are not conspiracy theorists.”–Dylan Avery, director of the “documentary” oddly title Loose Change.

No, Dylan you are not a conspiracy theorist. You are not a conspiracy theorist because you don’t have a theory, you have a belief. You have accepted a conclusion and then will ignore all evidence to the contrary instead heaping mountain upon mountain of plurality in an effort to discredit the actual scientific evidence in front of you. I am a theorist, I believe in a theory only when I see evidence to the positive that outweighs the evidence to the contrary. I will reject one theory when I see rational, reasonable counter theory to replace it.

He repeatedly claims, “I’d love to be proven wrong. I would love for someone to come to me and say I’m full of shit. It hasn’t happened…” (he then goes on to mention that he has scientists on his side–Source Village Voice) the issue is that when someone does try and prove him wrong, like say Popular Mechanics, who might I add has never been called to question regarding their objectivity; the evidence is immediately disregarded as being not accurate or is again heaped on the mountain of plurality.

Take the alleged evidence of the steel. Steel requires 2750 degrees Farenheight to melt, this isn’t up for contention. The fuel in airplanes burns at the highest 1500 degrees, again no one argues these points. Yet legions and legions of structural engineers, chemical engineers, and other various scientists will explain that in order for a building to collapse you don’t need to melt steel you just need to weaken it. Weakened steel with the weight of 1/8th of a building on top of it will drop a structure. But none of this matters because the plurality is so much more interesting: super-thermite. A non-explosive that is difficult to use on lateral cuts of vertical support beams because it is a powder. But if we add yet another plurality we can say that the super-zombie-ninja-pirates that placed all these explosives had some secret technology allowing to be placed effortlessly without anyone knowing it.

I wish I could be one of those people but ever since the Enlightenment we as a society have been moving forward under this idea of the scientific method. Which states that a theory is only to accepted once the evidence backs it up. I would love to live in a world where I could just make up evidence, disregard evidence to the contrary, and happily look down my nose at anyone that didn’t agree with me. I wish there was a word for these people…

…a word like “zealot,” of “fanatic.” That’s what we call them right? A person who despite all counter evidence still believes in a thing. A person that will dismiss such evidence before it is even heard, why don’t we ask Philosophy Professor David Griffin. whom I enjoy for his work on process theology. The inspiration for this post came from viewing a National Geographic special on the conspiracy. In the beginning of the special Griffin mentioned that they were going to run a bunch of experiments that would spend a lot of money but wouldn’t amount to any evidence.

What this means is that before the experiment where jet fuel caused a steel I-beam to collapse (even though the conspiracy group claims this is impossible) that he would dismiss the findings. I guess I should posit the counter-argument that the Griffin’s remarks were placed in the beginning of the show as a result of editing (just like how Sarah Palin’s quotes about Russia WEREN’T), but still the phrasing was such that no matter what evidence is shown it will always be dismissed in favor of the conspiracy.

The conspiracy of what? I ask. Avery and his ilk always stick to one point: they don’t have to offer a counter explanation as to motive. Well, yeah actually you people do. If you are going to dismiss the official explanation, the eye witness accounts (in the case of people who don’t believe that planes hit the towers), independent tests, you have to explain not only why these people are all wrong/mistake/lying but also what the goal of the conspiracy was and how it was accomplished.

Bombs: fine I’ll bite. How many people did it take, and how long? Oh you can’t give me those answers, because it would have to be before Bush was elected which means about 10 months. Cruise Missile: Ok, who shot it, from where, and how did they make it look like a plane?

You have to give the people an alternative explanation, but you won’t because you are afraid that anything you give will be resoundly shredded apart because all you have are questions. Worse than that you have questions that demand another investigation with subpoena powers; but where do you think that will get you? If you are right and you get that next investigation you don’t think that this conspiracy could silence that either. You are playing a zero-sum game and you know it. You know it because, Mr. Avery, you wrote this whole thing as a quasi-X Files conspiracy movie after talking to Tony Soprano. (Second paragraph)

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: