frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Are some "Conspiracy Theories" true, which ones, and why?

Debate Information

There are so many "conspiracy theories" out there. Many are completely bizarre, but yet has active followers and people who are convinced it's true.  Who has Burden of proof? 
Made some actually you believe are true? Which ones and why?
raspjirfsiokmmmm19Zombieguy1987
  1. Live Poll

    Are some "conspiracy theories" true?

    14 votes
    1. Yes
      64.29%
    2. No
      35.71%
  2. Live Poll

    Who has burden of proof?

    14 votes
    1. The person believing in the theory
      92.86%
    2. Everyone else
        7.14%
Live Long and Prosper



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Definition of conspiracy:
    a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

    To say that this has never happened is ludicrous. The CIA invented this term to discredit anyone doing research into said conspiracies.
    Zombieguy1987GooberryNathaniel_B
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    While I believe BOP should fall on the theorist, once reasonable doubt is secured, it should be shared.
    Nathaniel_B
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • WhyTrumpWhyTrump 234 Pts   -  
    Person believing in a weird consipracy theory should have burden of proof.  Most consipracy theories are just that..theories.
    Zombieguy1987
    WhyTrump - a good question
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @WhyTrump
    Gravity is a theory.
    Zombieguy1987Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • raspjirfraspjirf 13 Pts   -  
    A conspiracy theory which isn't true is the Earth being flat. This can not be physically possible. Although, I do understand some reasoning behind the conspiracy. Although, it just doesn't make full sense and seems to be false just like many other consipicies.
    ErfisflatZombieguy1987
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @raspjirf what's physically impossible is curved water. Please explain WHY you think a flat earth is impossible. 
    siokmmmm19Zombieguy1987
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • siokmmmm19siokmmmm19 13 Pts   -  
    @erisflat , it is possible to she curved water due to gravity.
    ErfisflatZombieguy1987
  • islander507islander507 194 Pts   -  
    What about JFK Assassination?  What about Hilary emails?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @erisflat , it is possible to she curved water due to gravity.
    Have you observed this yourself? What about opposing pressure systems? In the globe earth model a positive pressure system exists adjacent to a negative one. This is impossible without a physical barrier (light bulbs, compressed air) can you explain that to me?
    Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5965 Pts   -   edited October 2018
    A conspiracy theory is a theory that states that the evidence for something is not available, because it has been erased or cleverly covered up by the interest group(s) benefiting from it not being widely known. It is, by its very design, pure guessing. Shooting in the sky and hoping that the bullet it lands somewhere meaningful.

    Of course, sometimes guesses happen to be true. If you shoot in the sky a thousand times, you will probably hit something. In this sense, conspiracy theories may sometimes be proven to be true, as the new evidence is uncovered. It hardly makes them a valid construct in interpreting the world, however.

    I cannot really think of a single "concrete" conspiracy theory that turned out to be true, but there were many very vague theories that, by their very design, would probably turn out to be true eventually. For one, North Korea had been accusing South Korea of training agents in order to assassinate Kim Il Sung - this is what North Korea always does for no reason, right? Well, in 90-s the South Korean government released the information about the "Unit 684" which was trained in early 70-s with the primary mission being assassination of Kim. The mission was never really initiated, and North Korea had been accusing South Korea of nefarious plots since over 20 years before the Unit was even formed - but nonetheless, nowadays nobody can say that the North Korean claims were outright wrong.

    Conspiracy theories such as "Ebola does not exist" or "we are all controlled by aliens" are nonsense, of course. But things like "government X is probably performing some scientific experiments in secret" could very well turn out to be true - given they are vague enough to allow for a large array of possibilities.
    Zombieguy1987
  • Zombieguy1987Zombieguy1987 471 Pts   -  
    The only conspiracy theory I can believe is the British intentionally sank the Lusitania to drag the USA in to WW1
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    "A conspiracy theory is a theory that states that the evidence for something is not available, because it has been erased or cleverly covered up by the interest group(s) benefiting from it not being widely known. It is, by its very design, pure guessing. Shooting in the sky and hoping that the bullet it lands somewhere meaningful."

    That's ignorantly assumed, and is actually what the CIA, who started pushing the term, associating this with "crazy", or even "" with propoganda.

    https://www.mondialisation.ca/weaponizing-the-term-conspiracy-theory-disinformation-agents-and-the-cia/5524552/amp

    The term conspiracy theory is actually defined as:

    con·spir·a·cy the·o·ry
    noun
    1. a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event.

    This is entirely plausible, more so than would be asserted by the ignorant. Many times, the evidence is widely available, sometimes discoverable and verifiable within minutes.

    In actuality, some conspiracy theories are even admitted, like the MKultra and MKNaomi experiments, or various false flags thought history, all by definition, conspiracy theories, which turned out to be conspiracy facts.

    https://www.mondialisation.ca/fifty-eight-admitted-false-flag-attacks/5505411

    https://www.rd.com/culture/conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true/


    "Of course, sometimes guesses happen to be true. If you shoot in the sky a thousand times, you will probably hit something. In this sense, conspiracy theories may sometimes be proven to be true, as the new evidence is uncovered. It hardly makes them a valid construct in interpreting the world, however."

    So, because we have several conspiracy "facts" admitted, but we shouldn't assume an overall interpretation of how the world works?

     Are you saying that we should just trust these organizations to be telling the truth most of the time, or some of the time, or hardly ever, as long as they aren't bothering me in particular?

    Will you just wait to see which conspiracy theories (that you obviously haven't taken a second glance at) will finally be admitted, when it is too late?


    "I cannot really think of a single "concrete" conspiracy theory that turned out to be true, but there were many very vague theories that, by their very design, would probably turn out to be true eventually. "

    OffOthe top of my head, because it was so obvious: https://www.cnet.com/news/wikileaks-cia-hacking-tools-phones-apple-samsung-microsoft-google/

    " one, North Korea had been accusing South Korea of training agents in order to assassinate Kim Il Sung - this is what North Korea always does for no reason, right? Well, in 90-s the South Korean government released the information about the "Unit 684" which was trained in early 70-s with the primary mission being assassination of Kim. The mission was never really initiated, and North Korea had been accusing South Korea of nefarious plots since over 20 years before the Unit was even formed - but nonetheless, nowadays nobody can say that the North Korean claims were outright wrong.

    "Conspiracy theories such as "Ebola does not exist"

    Interesting, but not without evidence as you claim the "nonsensical" conspiracy theories are this video from the New York Times:



    As you can see, at JFK Hospital in Monrovia Liberia


     the actor allegedly has ebola is writhing around on the ground, half counscious and unable to hold his head up it would seem:





    The mother and father here seem somewhat unconcerned for their child's welfare, but that isn't the obvious part.

    The man is shown later to be in better spirits, and miraculously seems to be getting better!


    One might even make out a slight grin!




    When they finally open the doors,  "several hours later" actor seems to have made a nearly full recovery, and doesn't even appear to be concerned about the treatment anymore!



    And everyone seems to be ecstatic that the boy will finally get a much needed treatment.



    While this is somewhat inconclusive unless you are open minded enough, the cherry on top is the closing scene, where the "concerned father" is seen leaving his "dying" son.





    "or "we are all controlled by aliens" are nonsense, of course. But things like "government X is probably performing some scientific experiments in secret" could very well turn out to be true - given they are vague enough to allow for a large array of possibilities."

    @maycesar has me on mute, by the way.
    Zombieguy1987Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  

    Conspiracies exist - we mostly find out about them because humans are generally terrible at keeping secrets, and people are good at investigation stuff that seems off. With more than a few people involved, most stuff ends up getting revealed at some point.


    Conspiracy “theories” on the other hand - and let’s not equivocate on the word theory - are almost invariably untrue.


    The biggest ones, are mostly unsubstantiated conjecture glued together by a collection of disparate circumstantial facts that either cast some form of limited doubt on some portion of the current explanation - which almost invariably have reasonable or understandable explanations, or lends some tentative support to a different explanation: almost invariably pulled together with an absurd narrative that is not supported by the data, facts or any sort off rational explanstion.


    In most cases, conspiracy theories hide the impossibility and incoherence of their own position behind titbits of facts in order to deflect from the fact that they otherwise have no proof of anything that they’re saying.


    Most importantly, the conspiracy theorists do not spend as much time trying to scrutinize their own position as they do the narrative they are attacking. Resorting to unsupported speculation when the facts are not on their side.




    For example:


    A small number people believe NASA is lying about the earth being flat. They have no actual evidence of such a massive claim, but ironically point to things pictures not the NASA website, claiming to be composite pictures as evidence that pictures are fakes (IE their evidence of NASA is lying about faking images, is NASA telling the truth about their pictures)


    The idea that NASA, has managed to recruit the thousands of graphics designers, the people required to fake images, and to hire thousands of engineers and scientists over multiple decades - And managed to “get to” every satellite start up company, and convince them all to pretend that their rockets work and the earth is a sphere. 


    The whole argument is incoherent, and defies the basic precepts of rational thinking - and isn’t defended by anything more than ever more wild and unsubstantiated speculation.



    Also: Apparently the entire government and CIA is engaged in wide ranging mind control. This absurd claim, that makes no sense on its face (why are the only ones whose minds are not controlled the ones that know?) is completely unsupported by any data or evidence - there is nothing to show that’s what the government is doing now, to any degree whatsoever. 


    The only “evidence” provided are facts relating to experiments the government performed before. No evidence about what they’re doing now, how, or any specific claims that can be tested or refuted - just the same old speculation.



    It all fits the same pattern, a suppression of reasoning and critical thinking. Sometimes due to stupidity, sometimes for the emotional need to find bad actors in order to make a random world make sense, sometimes because of mental illness, sometimes because of induced paranoia and impairment due to drug use.


    Sometimes all of the above.


    ErfisflatZombieguy1987
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    1
    Zombieguy1987JoesephGooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    1
    Flat earth is incoherent - and I’ve spent 3 years refuting it on various sites.

    Creationism is also incoherent - and I’ve spent 10 years refuting it on various sites.


    There are many aspects to this reply I don’t understand:

    - I don’t understand how you feel that this is a response to anything I just said, in any way shape or form.

    - I don’t understand how the most common and frequent arguments you make, is complaining about people using Ad-Homs: and yet you so commonly and frequently resort to them at almost every opportunity.

    - I don’t understand how it’s even an insult, or negative. Is not like I think it’s coherent - and have argued against it - or even that I think it’s incohetent and
    argued for it.





    Zombieguy1987
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    I
    Zombieguy1987Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    I
    And again, are you simply ignoring everything said so far?

    By all means, if you want to object to anything I’ve said, you can do that: but at the moment I'm just going to assume your petulant name calling is just because you have no argument.


    So, specifically - I have a special criteria for things I call “incoherent”, which largely matches the dictionary definition - this is primarily positions that refute themselves.

    Most conspiracy theories are incoherent - including flat earth - because If you applied the logical arguments, burden of proof and approach that conspiracy theorists used to “argue” existing theories are wrong, it would necessarily mean their own positions have to be concluded as wrong too.


    EG: - You say a spherical earth is disproven by measurements that “show” it’s flat - but a flat earth is not disproven by measurements that show its a sphere. you argue geometry doesn’t represent the world, the constantly cite geometry to support your position. You say the position of the sun and the moon can’t be used to determine the shape of the earth - then use the sun and moon during a type of eclipse to argue the earth is flat.


    It’s not possible to argue this, or any other conspiracy theory without using this rhetorical hypocrisy or skewed burden of proof - therefore making the inherent claims, and the theories themselves incoherent as a result.





    Erfisflat
  • YeshuaBoughtYeshuaBought 669 Pts   -  
    Zombieguy1987Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2018
    "And again, are you simply ignoring everything said so far?"

    You haven't actually said anything worth paying attention to. A few nuh uhs is all I see, this was the purpose for the memes.

    "By all means, if you want to object to anything I’ve said, you can do that: but at the moment I'm just going to assume your petulant name calling is just because you have no argument."

    If I've called you a name at all I
    In those meme's, please, point it out. Otherwise your assertion of such is petulant, along with the rest of your post.


    "So, specifically - I have a special criteria for things I call “incoherent”, which largely matches the dictionary definition - this is primarily positions that refute themselves.

    Most conspiracy theories are incoherent - including flat earth - because If you applied the logical arguments, burden of proof and approach that conspiracy theorists used to “argue” existing theories are wrong, it would necessarily mean their own positions have to be concluded as wrong too."

    That is a a completely incoherent statement.


    "EG: - You say a spherical earth is disproven by measurements that “show” it’s flat - but a flat earth is not disproven by measurements that show its a sphere."


    And vice versa for you.


    "you argue geometry doesn’t represent the world, the constantly cite geometry to support your position. "


    You are completelyctaking that out of context, which is dishonest, not surprising.


    "You say the position of the sun and the moon can’t be used to determine the shape of the earth - then use the sun and moon during a type of eclipse to argue the earth is flat."

    That is a blatant lie. The selenelion argument is evidence that positively refutes the idea that the earth comes between the sun and moon. An evidence against the heliocentric model you have yet to even attempt to defend.


    "It’s not possible to argue this, or any other conspiracy theory without using this rhetorical hypocrisy or skewed burden of proof - therefore making the inherent claims, and the theories themselves incoherent as a result."


    Vague and baseless assertions.

    Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    I'd be willing to bet that the two nay-sayers who marked the ebola post as a fallacy can't identify a single one in that post.
    Zombieguy1987Gooberry
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    "And again, are you simply ignoring everything said so far?"

    You haven't actually said anything worth paying attention to. A few nuh uhs is all I see, this was the purpose for the memes.

    "By all means, if you want to object to anything I’ve said, you can do that: but at the moment I'm just going to assume your petulant name calling is just because you have no argument."

    If I've called you a name at all I
    In those meme's, please, point it out. Otherwise your assertion of such is petulant, along with the rest of your post.


    "So, specifically - I have a special criteria for things I call “incoherent”, which largely matches the dictionary definition - this is primarily positions that refute themselves.

    Most conspiracy theories are incoherent - including flat earth - because If you applied the logical arguments, burden of proof and approach that conspiracy theorists used to “argue” existing theories are wrong, it would necessarily mean their own positions have to be concluded as wrong too."

    That is a a completely incoherent statement.


    "EG: - You say a spherical earth is disproven by measurements that “show” it’s flat - but a flat earth is not disproven by measurements that show its a sphere."


    And vice versa for you.


    "you argue geometry doesn’t represent the world, the constantly cite geometry to support your position. "


    You are completelyctaking that out of context, which is dishonest, not surprising.


    "You say the position of the sun and the moon can’t be used to determine the shape of the earth - then use the sun and moon during a type of eclipse to argue the earth is flat."

    That is a blatant lie. The selenelion argument is evidence that positively refutes the idea that the earth comes between the sun and moon.


    "It’s not possible to argue this, or any other conspiracy theory without using this rhetorical hypocrisy or skewed burden of proof - therefore making the inherent claims, and the theories themselves incoherent as a result."


    Vague and baseless assertions.

    In this reply, your replies are essentially 

    1.) “I’m not listening”

    2.) “I’ve engages in repeated ad hominems, but I’m not technically name calling, so it’s all okay, and I don’t have to bother defending against any accusations of ad hominems”.

    3.) “while I’m claiming I’m not name calling, I’m going to call you names”

    4.) “I’m not going to say, what, when, why, how, give examples, reasons or justifications - but your argument is terrible!”

    5.) “I use geometry, then say geometry doesnt represent reality - I can’t defend that inconsistency - nor can I deny saying those things because you will quote me - so I have to simply tell you you’re wrong.”

    6.) “Even though I won’t explain where, I can find no explicit quotes to that effect, and Despite it being a made up fabrication - I am going to lie and say you do the same thing as I do”.

    7.) “I’m going to call you a for suggesting that I am claiming the position and sun and moon refutes the spherical earth by clarifying that I believe position of the sun and earth refutes the spherical earth.”

    8.) you’re wrong, though I won’t say why how, what, where, when how, give any
    reasons or justifications.



    This is why no one takes you seriously: you systematically avoid debate, answering questions, defending your claims or otherwise trying to do more than calling other people wrong.

    In my first reply, I outlined the issues with conspiracy theories. You have no response. 

    In on my second, I point out that seem to be just attacking people’s behaviour, rather than offering any argument. You have no response.

    in my last reply, I point out why I call your position incoherent. Again, you have no response.

    Your words, posted after my quotes - i won’t give you the credit of calling it a response - offers no reasons, justifications, facts, evidence, logical reasoning, examples or otherwise to deal with anything I’ve said.

    Youre just engaging, as you always do, in an emphatic non-defense of your position where you try and shout the loudest about how right you are.


    If you’re not willing to address anything said: stop responding like you do to I’m every single post where details, evidence and arguments are exchanged. Please don’t bother wasting everyone’s time with this vacuous nonsense that I’m sure even you won’t bother to defend as anything more than a bout of vitrolic denial fed by your own inability to credibly defend anything you say.


  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    "And again, are you simply ignoring everything said so far?"

    You haven't actually said anything worth paying attention to. A few nuh uhs is all I see, this was the purpose for the memes.

    "By all means, if you want to object to anything I’ve said, you can do that: but at the moment I'm just going to assume your petulant name calling is just because you have no argument."

    If I've called you a name at all I
    In those meme's, please, point it out. Otherwise your assertion of such is petulant, along with the rest of your post.


    "So, specifically - I have a special criteria for things I call “incoherent”, which largely matches the dictionary definition - this is primarily positions that refute themselves.

    Most conspiracy theories are incoherent - including flat earth - because If you applied the logical arguments, burden of proof and approach that conspiracy theorists used to “argue” existing theories are wrong, it would necessarily mean their own positions have to be concluded as wrong too."

    That is a a completely incoherent statement.


    "EG: - You say a spherical earth is disproven by measurements that “show” it’s flat - but a flat earth is not disproven by measurements that show its a sphere."


    And vice versa for you.


    "you argue geometry doesn’t represent the world, the constantly cite geometry to support your position. "


    You are completelyctaking that out of context, which is dishonest, not surprising.


    "You say the position of the sun and the moon can’t be used to determine the shape of the earth - then use the sun and moon during a type of eclipse to argue the earth is flat."

    That is a blatant lie. The selenelion argument is evidence that positively refutes the idea that the earth comes between the sun and moon.


    "It’s not possible to argue this, or any other conspiracy theory without using this rhetorical hypocrisy or skewed burden of proof - therefore making the inherent claims, and the theories themselves incoherent as a result."


    Vague and baseless assertions.

    In this reply, your replies are essentially 

    1.) “I’m not listening”

    2.) “I’ve engages in repeated ad hominems, but I’m not technically name calling, so it’s all okay, and I don’t have to bother defending against any accusations of ad hominems”.

    3.) “while I’m claiming I’m not name calling, I’m going to call you names”

    4.) “I’m not going to say, what, when, why, how, give examples, reasons or justifications - but your argument is terrible!”

    5.) “I use geometry, then say geometry doesnt represent reality - I can’t defend that inconsistency - nor can I deny saying those things because you will quote me - so I have to simply tell you you’re wrong.”

    6.) “Even though I won’t explain where, I can find no explicit quotes to that effect, and Despite it being a made up fabrication - I am going to lie and say you do the same thing as I do”.

    7.) “I’m going to call you a for suggesting that I am claiming the position and sun and moon refutes the spherical earth by clarifying that I believe position of the sun and earth refutes the spherical earth.”

    8.) you’re wrong, though I won’t say why how, what, where, when how, give any
    reasons or justifications.



    This is why no one takes you seriously: you systematically avoid debate, answering questions, defending your claims or otherwise trying to do more than calling other people wrong.

    In my first reply, I outlined the issues with conspiracy theories. You have no response. 

    In on my second, I point out that seem to be just attacking people’s behaviour, rather than offering any argument. You have no response.

    in my last reply, I point out why I call your position incoherent. Again, you have no response.

    Your words, posted after my quotes - i won’t give you the credit of calling it a response - offers no reasons, justifications, facts, evidence, logical reasoning, examples or otherwise to deal with anything I’ve said.

    Youre just engaging, as you always do, in an emphatic non-defense of your position where you try and shout the loudest about how right you are.


    If you’re not willing to address anything said: stop responding like you do to I’m every single post where details, evidence and arguments are exchanged. Please don’t bother wasting everyone’s time with this vacuous nonsense that I’m sure even you won’t bother to defend as anything more than a bout of vitrolic denial fed by your own inability to credibly defend anything you say.


    Erfisflat
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5965 Pts   -  
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Zombieguy1987
  • Zombieguy1987Zombieguy1987 471 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat ;
    "MayCaesar has me on mute"


    Gooberry
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    You can deny the conspiracy as crazy if you like. The evidence is there, despite your claim that there is no evidence for conspiracy theories. 

    Maybe it is more likely that, having done zero research, you are merely ignorant to that evidence or evidence for other conspiracies? 
    GooberryZombieguy1987
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    I'd be willing to bet that the two nay-sayers who marked the ebola post as a fallacy can't identify a single one in that post.

    Fallacy of composition (that one exceptional - at worst -example is representative of all Ebola suffers) an arguable fallacy of “proving too much” (as your same reasoning could be used to make a multitude of other claims) , cherry picking (choosing this one video out of thousands of others), hasty generalization (similar to FOC - that one example is probative of all samples), possibly an argument from incredulity (about being incredulous that the dad could walk away).

    Zombieguy1987
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Apparently, it appears that Erf has come to the conclusion that tens of thousands thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of doctors, medical researchers, politicians, journalists, civilians who were infected, in villages that were infected, saw people infected and the friends and families are all lying to a man.

    His evidence of this fantastical and broad claims

    - an Ebola victim sat up.
    - an Ebola victims face, zoomed in at one point may have looked like a smirk.
    - an Ebola victims father, didn’t stay in a hospital full of contagious Ebola victims. 

    You heard the man.

    The evidence is there...

    Zombieguy1987Joeseph
  • Zombieguy1987Zombieguy1987 471 Pts   -   edited October 2018
    Erfisflat said:
    I'd be willing to bet that the two nay-sayers who marked the ebola post as a fallacy can't identify a single one in that post.
    "I'd be willing to bet that the one nay-sayer who says that people who use "evidence" to disprove what smart people say can't identify a single one in general”-Zombieguy1987 circa 2018
    GooberryJoeseph
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Please realize that I don't necessarily believe that "ebola does not exist", just that the outbreak scares we're a hoax. Ebola may very well exist, but the media, as usual, blew it way out of proportion, and it was basically a scam that raked in billions.
    Zombieguy1987GooberryJoeseph
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • Zombieguy1987Zombieguy1987 471 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Please realize that I don't necessarily believe that "ebola does not exist", just that the outbreak scares we're a hoax. Ebola may very well exist, but the media, as usual, blew it way out of proportion, and it was basically a scam that raked in billions.
    And what did they do with those "Billions" of dollars?
    Gooberry
  • JoesephJoeseph 652 Pts   -  
    @Zombieguy1987

    They’re probably using the money to prove that Evolution is fact ..... Wait no ....that’s been done ..... maybe they will use it to prove the earths round ..... wait no that’s been done .........wonder what they did with it , hookers , beer and drugs no doubt 
    GooberryErfisflatZombieguy1987
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2018
    Erfisflat said:
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Please realize that I don't necessarily believe that "ebola does not exist", just that the outbreak scares we're a hoax. Ebola may very well exist, but the media, as usual, blew it way out of proportion, and it was basically a scam that raked in billions.
    And what did they do with those "Billions" of dollars?
    Who cares, and why is this relevant? It doesn't disprove the fact that they did it.
    Zombieguy1987
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • GooberryGooberry 608 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Please realize that I don't necessarily believe that "ebola does not exist", just that the outbreak scares we're a hoax. Ebola may very well exist, but the media, as usual, blew it way out of proportion, and it was basically a scam that raked in billions.
    And what did they do with those "Billions" of dollars?
    Who cares, and why is this relevant? It doesn't disprove the fact that they did it.
    Wait: it’s now a “fact” that they did it? And it needs to be disproved?

    What fact is this? What is it based on? That video; I’ve explained why that was ridiculous.

    Youve managed to make it a fact now?


    Its not a fact, it thunderous cretin: like almost every other conspiracy theory, it is unsupported, largely unsubstantiated speculation based on the loosest of circumstantial evidence, and makes absolutely no sense in any shape or form when you actually start looking at what would have had to happen.

    You have no evidence at all for this, and are running away from your claims by offering no defense.
    Zombieguy1987JoesephErfisflat
  • Nathaniel_BNathaniel_B 182 Pts   -  
    I would not say they are true, but some theories like 9/11 being an inside job seem to be true.  A lot of people, even some experts, agree that planes couldn't cause the collapse of steel skyscrapers, and that their collapse was the result of explosive material/bombs bringing them down. I mean did a plane REALLY hit the Pentagon? Where's the video evidence besides the low quality video that we were showed that shows absolutely NOTHING hitting the Pentagon. I didn't see a wing, the shape of the plane, or the tail heading towards the building, I mean...man that's crazy. Some theories are nutty, but some make sense. 
    Erfisflat
    “Communism is evil. Its driving forces are the deadly sins of envy and hatred.” ~Peter Drucker 

    "It's not a gun control problem, it's a cultural control problem."
    Bob Barr
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Gooberry said:
    MayCaesar said:
    When I mentioned "Ebola does not exist", I was joking and purposefully selected the most random claim I could think of at the moment to illustrate the point. I did not realize it was an actual conspiracy theory someone believed in. :)

    Given the amount of crazies on the Internet, it is becoming difficult to make any statement even on purpose that will not be supported by, at least, someone. Maybe 2+2=5? Although I will not be surprised if there is a conspiracy theory in that regard as well: "Guuuuuys, math teachers have been lying to us all this time in order to hide the existence of god! In reality, 2+2=5, and the extra one comes from the divine influence!"
    Apparently, it appears that Erf has come to the conclusion that tens of thousands thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of doctors, medical researchers, politicians, journalists, civilians who were infected, in villages that were infected, saw people infected and the friends and families are all lying to a man.

    His evidence of this fantastical and broad claims

    - an Ebola victim sat up.
    - an Ebola victims face, zoomed in at one point may have looked like a smirk.
    - an Ebola victims father, didn’t stay in a hospital full of contagious Ebola victims. 

    You heard the man.

    The evidence is there...

    Sorry, I just saw this. 

    Where are these "tens of thousands thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of doctors, medical researchers, politicians, journalists, civilians who were infected, in villages that were infected, saw people infected and the friends and families are all lying to a man"?

    The "ebola victim" sat up, after hours of suffering, no vomit, no feces, unless you want to point at the dirt on his pants, which can be easily faked. 

    The man clearly just received the money, leaving in hand, you ignored that too.
    Zombieguy1987
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    I would not say they are true, but some theories like 9/11 being an inside job seem to be true.  A lot of people, even some experts, agree that planes couldn't cause the collapse of steel skyscrapers, and that their collapse was the result of explosive material/bombs bringing them down. I mean did a plane REALLY hit the Pentagon? Where's the video evidence besides the low quality video that we were showed that shows absolutely NOTHING hitting the Pentagon. I didn't see a wing, the shape of the plane, or the tail heading towards the building, I mean...man that's crazy. Some theories are nutty, but some make sense. 
    This event claimed thousands of lives. You at least have common sense to realize that there is something amiss, whereas some people just deny that any questions should even be asked! This makes me question their motives to be honest.

    If they will kill thousands of innocent people, what else would they do for their agenda?
    Zombieguy1987
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch