--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > new.morning wrote: > > >My point from my past post was: > >Of the 10,000's of conspiracy theories that were present in the 60's > >and/or 70's and/or 80s that have not panned out -- only a few have > >born any seeds of credibility -- far from a 1:1 correspondence between > >conspiracy theories and their actual fruition 10-30 years later. > > > > > > > This is just a statement you made up. And as Judy points out not > necessarily true.
Perhaps we are having a language malfunction here. Your statemetn above implies that you believe that all conspiracy theories over the past 30 years are true. My point, above, in other words, is that they are not. If you truly believe they are -- eveything depicting a conspiritorial charge written or voiced in the past 30+ years is true -- including in the Berkeley Barb, The Inquirier, the British tabloids, Rush Limbaugh, the John Birch Society (the communist conspiracy), Ted Kazinski, posts om FFL, the Nixon Whitehouse (they are all out to get me, the jews, the students, the arabs, the democrats, the ivy-leagers, the marchers....), the Johnson White House, the Bush White house (the muslim conspiracy) --- many more examples, etc, then enough said. I think your "position", "view" and "state" are clear. If you don't hold such an extreme view, and do not hold that there is a 1:1 correspondence bewteen each and every conspiracy theories and their actual fruition 10-30 years later, then we are in agreement. > All I am doing is presenting these issues for peoples consideration. If > I want to play on a hunch or intuitive insight I will. Thats fine. Thats far from implying all conspiratorial claims in the past 30 years have turned out correct. > My intuition > has usually been more right than wrong regardless who crazy the idea > is. A lot of people here thought I was wacko about the recent airline > bomb plot when I pointed out it was bogus. Later the news showed it > was. HAHAHAHA. You are a legend in your own mind. Some aspects of the plot are weird, some odd, some amusing. But if you are implying the plot was totally manufactured by Blair and Bush, and this has been fully and indisputible confirmed in the press, then you really are quite whacko. > Now lets see some of your intuitive insight Mr. "I'm in Brahman." Huh? > >I am sure there is some small population of very insecure people who > >react this way. > > > > >In contrast, personally, I don't give much probability to theories > >that have little or no evidence -- and have "odd" features. Other > >things, with mounting credible evidence, I give higher and higher > >assessements of plausibility and probability. > > > > > Guess you're not a theoretical physicist or mathematician nor an artist > nor musician. I have worked with risk assessment and and decisions under uncertainty most of my professional life. Sounds like you have not. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
