Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Your Theories Won?t Do It  (Read 2405 times)

Offline Dillon Rankine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Your Theories Won?t Do It
« on: April 07, 2019, 11:43:19 AM »
Psychologists have long since noted a crucial function of CT epistemology ? they focus on errant data: that which isn?t explained by the official model. CTs are scarcely interested in making a cogent theory from the main facts, but rather they try to pull it down by connecting errant, auxiliary data.

Just look around this forum: CTs left and right arguing about the data of this document, what that witness smelled, and how dodgy the autopsy was, all in some desperate attempt to explain everything.

Listen CTs: your theories won?t do it. You can?t explain every fact. No theory of how anything works is going to account for everything, because, simply put, we don?t know everything about the world yet to be able to connect all the dots. Coincidences and anomalies are ok, because they happen in the real world ? sometimes in a dazzlingly large quantity.

I?d you?re goal is to explain everything?s forget about it. Think Thompson once said that when you?ve got a fact so obviously conclusive of your theory ? so obviously sinister ? forget about it, man, because you on your own cannot come up with all the perfectly reasonable, non-sinister explanations for that fact.       

I joined this forum 5 years ago certain of a conspiracy ? 5 gunmen, 8 bullets (with no mystic missiles in sight) ? involving the CIA, mob, and LBJ. I?d read all the CT books ? Mantik, Marrs, Fetzer, McLaren, Menninger, Wrone, Lane, DiEugenio, Groden, you name it ? but after looking beyond the bubble, I began to realise something. Each and every one of these authors conveniently misses out on our favourite sociopath. Oswald?s life is trivialised, ignored or glamorised. We?re never told about Robert Oswald?s conversation with his brother at the DPD; anything shady Oswald did is rationalised as the marching orders of the CIA.

Today, I?m almost a pure LNer. I strongly doubt a conspiracy, and can explain the shooting in three bullets from the SN.         

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2019, 12:03:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I?d you?re goal is to explain everything?s forget about it. Think Thompson once said that when you?ve got a fact so obviously conclusive of your theory ? so obviously sinister ? forget about it, man, because you on your own cannot come up with all the perfectly reasonable, non-sinister explanations for that fact.           

Great! Now go apply that to all the sinister constructions put on Mr Oswald's actions by your favourite theory.  Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2019, 12:03:42 PM »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4831
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2019, 06:25:06 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Listen CTs: your theories won?t do it. You can?t explain every fact. No theory of how anything works is going to account for everything, because, simply put, we don?t know everything about the world yet to be able to connect all the dots. Coincidences and anomalies are ok, because they happen in the real world ? sometimes in a dazzlingly large quantity.

Any explanation will do ? as long as you ignore the parts that don?t fit.

Online Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1952
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2019, 06:52:10 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Any explanation will do ? as long as you ignore the parts that don?t fit.

No explanation will do - as long as you ignore the parts that fit.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2019, 06:52:10 PM »

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2019, 08:48:52 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Psychologists have long since noted a crucial function of CT epistemology ? they focus on errant data: that which isn?t explained by the official model. CTs are scarcely interested in making a cogent theory from the main facts, but rather they try to pull it down by connecting errant, auxiliary data.

Just look around this forum: CTs left and right arguing about the data of this document, what that witness smelled, and how dodgy the autopsy was, all in some desperate attempt to explain everything.

Listen CTs: your theories won?t do it. You can?t explain every fact. No theory of how anything works is going to account for everything, because, simply put, we don?t know everything about the world yet to be able to connect all the dots. Coincidences and anomalies are ok, because they happen in the real world ? sometimes in a dazzlingly large quantity.

I?d you?re goal is to explain everything?s forget about it. Think Thompson once said that when you?ve got a fact so obviously conclusive of your theory ? so obviously sinister ? forget about it, man, because you on your own cannot come up with all the perfectly reasonable, non-sinister explanations for that fact.       

I joined this forum 5 years ago certain of a conspiracy ? 5 gunmen, 8 bullets (with no mystic missiles in sight) ? involving the CIA, mob, and LBJ. I?d read all the CT books ? Mantik, Marrs, Fetzer, McLaren, Menninger, Wrone, Lane, DiEugenio, Groden, you name it ? but after looking beyond the bubble, I began to realise something. Each and every one of these authors conveniently misses out on our favourite sociopath. Oswald?s life is trivialised, ignored or glamorised. We?re never told about Robert Oswald?s conversation with his brother at the DPD; anything shady Oswald did is rationalised as the marching orders of the CIA.

Today, I?m almost a pure LNer. I strongly doubt a conspiracy, and can explain the shooting in three bullets from the SN.         

I joined the forum over seven years ago and I've never been able to convert any CT into a LN. It just doesn't happen that way.  Those CTs who do come over to the LN side do so on their own. I encountered you  when you joined up and have watched you slowly and steadily come to the realization that the CT view is unsustainable under the scrutinous logical eye.

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2019, 05:07:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Psychologists have long since noted a crucial function of CT epistemology ? they focus on errant data: that which isn?t explained by the official model. CTs are scarcely interested in making a cogent theory from the main facts, but rather they try to pull it down by connecting errant, auxiliary data.

Just look around this forum: CTs left and right arguing about the data of this document, what that witness smelled, and how dodgy the autopsy was, all in some desperate attempt to explain everything.

Listen CTs: your theories won?t do it. You can?t explain every fact. No theory of how anything works is going to account for everything, because, simply put, we don?t know everything about the world yet to be able to connect all the dots. Coincidences and anomalies are ok, because they happen in the real world ? sometimes in a dazzlingly large quantity.

I?d you?re goal is to explain everything?s forget about it. Think Thompson once said that when you?ve got a fact so obviously conclusive of your theory ? so obviously sinister ? forget about it, man, because you on your own cannot come up with all the perfectly reasonable, non-sinister explanations for that fact.       

I joined this forum 5 years ago certain of a conspiracy ? 5 gunmen, 8 bullets (with no mystic missiles in sight) ? involving the CIA, mob, and LBJ. I?d read all the CT books ? Mantik, Marrs, Fetzer, McLaren, Menninger, Wrone, Lane, DiEugenio, Groden, you name it ? but after looking beyond the bubble, I began to realise something. Each and every one of these authors conveniently misses out on our favourite sociopath. Oswald?s life is trivialised, ignored or glamorised. We?re never told about Robert Oswald?s conversation with his brother at the DPD; anything shady Oswald did is rationalised as the marching orders of the CIA.

Today, I?m almost a pure LNer. I strongly doubt a conspiracy, and can explain the shooting in three bullets from the SN.         

And when all is said and done, a conspiracy is essential to explain away why Oswald defenders can never offer direct proof to validate their theories.  Like UFOs believers, JFK CTers can make all manner of outlandish claims and then avoid ever having to offer any support by attributing the lack of proof to a cover up.  It's a circular process that allows CTers to eat their cake and have it too.  They also rarely accept the implications of their nonsense being true.  If A did not happen as they allege, then logically something else like B must have happened.  But they have no interest in discussing B because the alternative is often absurd, involves multiple individuals lying for no apparent reason, and makes no narrative sense much less is there any evidence to support.  The theory stops at pedantic nitpicking of A.   It becomes a "strawman" or "loaded" question to ask them what they are suggesting if A is not true as they contend.  For example, some lazy contrarians here don't accept the evidence that Oswald owned the MC rifle found on the 6th floor.  They refuse to answer, however, whether they believe the underlying evidence linking Oswald to the rifle is fake or not.   They apparently realize the absurdity of all this evidence as derived from a variety of different sources being the product of fakery.  But they don't miss a beat in continuing to claim there is doubt about Oswald's ownership of the rifle.  It is just so.  It's dishonest defense attorney tactics to protect a guilty client rather than an honest assessment of the evidence and logical inferences that can be derived from the facts and evidence.  An endless tactic to avoid admitting checkmate.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2019, 05:07:38 PM »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2393
Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2019, 07:42:33 PM »

Anyone who ignores the screaming evidence of Oswald being CIA isn't being honest...

Quote
Robert Tanenbaum (former Deputy Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations) testified that he read the transcript of the secret session Ford was referring to.  In 1996 Tanenbaum testified at an ARRB hearing in Los Angeles by saying, "the Attorney General of Texas, Henry Wade the District Attorney and Leon Jaworsky counsel to the Attorney General, on the transcript spoke to the Chief Justice and said in substance, as I recall, that they had information from unimpeachable sources that Lee Harvey Oswald was a contract employee of the CIA and the FBI."

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2019, 07:55:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I?d you?re goal is to explain everything?s forget about it. Think Thompson....
  Does anyone understand this?
 

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2019, 07:55:25 PM »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4831
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2019, 08:36:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They also rarely accept the implications of their nonsense being true.  If A did not happen as they allege, then logically something else like B must have happened.

Except that "B" never logically follows from "A".  That's why this is known as the "Richard Smith" strawman dance.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4831
Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2019, 08:37:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
  Does anyone understand this?

I think he meant:

"If your goal is to explain everything, forget about it. Tink Thompson...."
« Last Edit: April 08, 2019, 08:38:23 PM by John Iacoletti »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Your Theories Won?t Do It
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2019, 08:37:13 PM »

 

Mobile View