A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?

[Colin Crow]

'Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication' - Clare Luce Booth*

Luce's statement ironically renders Colin's plea for a more sophisticated description of CTers somewhat contradictory.

K.I.S.S. =  Keep It Simple Sherlock  =  Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald



*misattributed to Apple, Leonardo da Vinci, and Steve Jobs

On the contrary Bill.......

You can all become more sophisticated by providing a simple definition of what you deem CT'ers to be. A task so far has yet to be reached by your group.

Thanks for proving my point.

[Colin Crow]

'Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication' - Clare Luce Booth*

Luce's statement ironically renders Colin's plea for a more sophisticated description of CTers somewhat contradictory.

K.I.S.S. =  Keep It Simple Sherlock  =  Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald



*misattributed to Apple, Leonardo da Vinci, and Steve Jobs

By the way Bill simplicity is not the same as simplistic.....

[Walt Cakebread]

Specifically, CTer, here, means someone who believes that there was a successful conspiracy to murder President Kennedy.


In general, CTer means someone who believes in any large conspiracy that successfully kept a secret for a long time, however unlikely this would be. Examples are:

** A worldwide Jewish conspiracy to do evil things to non-Jewish races.

** illuminati

** Freemason?s

** Apollo Moon Landing Hoax

** UFO coverup


A sign of such a conspiracy theory is if the proponents do not provide a list of all the people involved because the list would be too large and make it too obvious that they believe in a large conspiracy.

You've omitted the most obvious....The US Government.....   

[Joe Elliott]

Perhaps I am not making myself clear. I have no problem with WC Defender instead of LN because  . . .

And I have no problem with LN or ?Lone Nutter?. There is a tradition of supporters of Democracy adopting the derisive name the other side gave to them. Like ?Yankee Doodle? or Yankees.

Personally I don?t have a theory that explains the events at this stage. However from what I have read and interpreted I am sceptical about the WC version. I do believe man landed on the moon, that Bigfoot does not exist, that creationism is merely a religious belief and that evolution is scientifically based. I do not believe in the illuminati or conspiracies involving the Freemasons, New Word Order, Skull and Crossbones, that climate change is real.....

I am a sceptic.....someone who is trained to be....that?s how scientific method works.

It doesn?t matter which Large Secret Conspiracy you believe in, which amazingly enough, has kept its secret for a long period of time. If you believe in any of them, Freemasons, New World Order, JFK conspiracy, you are not a skeptic. Or sceptic. No matter what you call yourself.


Holocaust Deniers can call themselves ? ?Conventional History Skeptics?
Moon Landing Hoaxers can call themselves ? ?U S Government Skeptics?
JFK CTers can call also themselves ? ?U S Government Skeptics?

None of them are skeptics. Anymore than ?Scientific Creationists? are a type of scientist.



It?s no good to say the JFK conspiracy has not successfully kept its secrets, at least to any thinking man. Because the World Wide Jewish Conspiracy believers will say the same thing.

[Colin Crow]

And I have no problem with LN or ?Lone Nutter?. There is a tradition of supporters of Democracy adopting the derisive name the other side gave to them. Like ?Yankee Doodle? or Yankees.



It doesn?t matter which Large Secret Conspiracy you believe in, which amazingly enough, has kept its secret for a long period of time. If you believe in any of them, Freemasons, New World Order, JFK conspiracy, you are not a skeptic. Or sceptic. No matter what you call yourself.


Holocaust Deniers can call themselves ? ?Conventional History Skeptics?
Moon Landing Hoaxers can call themselves ? ?U S Government Skeptics?
JFK CTers can call also themselves ? ?U S Government Skeptics?

None of them are skeptics. Anymore than ?Scientific Creationists? are a type of scientist.



It?s no good to say the JFK conspiracy has not successfully kept its secrets, at least to any thinking man. Because the World Wide Jewish Conspiracy believers will say the same thing.

So if I don?t consider the conspiracy to assassinate was neccessarily large scale what does that make me?

I hope you appreciated the quote from Shermer regarding the use of labels as pigeonholing....

[Tim Nickerson]

In any case, Griffith also believes in Scientific Creationism and that the Theory of Evolution is false. He also argues that the North was wrong to fight the Civil War and that the Confederacy was right to secede from the Union and it was wrong for the North to prevent this.

I'm not sure why you included that. Is there something conspiratorial in that stance of his? Is he denying science with it? It seems to me that he's merely expressing a political-like ideology with it.

[Colin Crow]

Taken from https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/polls/democrats-and-republicans-differ-on-conspiracy-theory-beliefs/