| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:04 am Post subject: 9-11 Conspiracy hits mainstream....via a work of fiction... |
 |
|
http://911blogger.com/node/14720
Steve Alten recently published his "fictional" novel, Shell Game.
It is based within current "conspiracy theories" involving all the usual suspects: peak oil, PNAC, 9-11, afghan-iraq-iran wars, future dirty bomb false flags.
I was at first very sceptical about this book and its affect on the 9-11 movement. However it seems that these issues are being accepted rather openly in the guise of "fiction". Steve Alten is an award winning author.
I haven't read the book yet though....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
link fixed  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I was at first very sceptical about this book |
And so you should be.
There is a radical difference between a real conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. One explains a plot between a few dedicated people to accomplish one and only one evil deed. The other tries to explain a very large chunk of human experience. One explains a small corner of human history, important or not. The other attempts to explain a very large part of how the universe works.
As someone significantly older than yourself, I'd like to offer you a little bit of advice: Consider why you spell 'sceptical' the Latin way rather than the Greek way (with a 'k'). This will tell you a great deal about yourself and your world-view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I was at first very sceptical about this book |
And so you should be.
There is a radical difference between a real conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. One explains a plot between a few dedicated people to accomplish one and only one evil deed. The other tries to explain a very large chunk of human experience. One explains a small corner of human history, important or not. The other attempts to explain a very large part of how the universe works.
As someone significantly older than yourself, I'd like to offer you a little bit of advice: Consider why you spell 'sceptical' the Latin way rather than the Greek way (with a 'k'). This will tell you a great deal about yourself and your world-view. |
3 beers later and this still makes little sense 
Oh and the reason I spell it with a c is because the computer I am using marks it as a spelling error if I use a K. So, what does that tell me? Time for a new computer? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| 3 beers later and this still makes little sense |
Perhaps it's the #3 that is the problem. Read it again tomorrow when there is no alcohol to interfere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
He shares in their nuttiness; a full blown truther he is |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
He shares in their nuttiness; a full blown truther he is |
Or so his bagmen would like you to believe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
He shares in their nuttiness; a full blown truther he is |
Or so his bagmen would like you to believe. |
Yes that could be case
But I wonder how effective that would be for sales?
It would surely draw the truthers to the novel, but is it really that big of a marketable group of people?
On the other hand, I'm not too sure how this would play out for the general public who still believe the official narrative of 9-11. Would his "coming out as a full blown truther" increase or hurt sales? I bet a logical argument could be made for both sides.
Nonetheless, I'll be buying the novel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
He shares in their nuttiness; a full blown truther he is |
Or so his bagmen would like you to believe. |
Yes that could be case
But I wonder how effective that would be for sales?
It would surely draw the truthers to the novel, but is it really that big of a marketable group of people?
On the other hand, I'm not too sure how this would play out for the general public who still believe the official narrative of 9-11. Would his "coming out as a full blown truther" increase or hurt sales? I bet a logical argument could be made for both sides.
Nonetheless, I'll be buying the novel |
I think a large % of the general public believe they're not being told the whole story. Of course that is no support for the conspiracy theory. That is merely the fallacy of argument by popularity. 1 billion chinese can't be wrong, for example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Someone making money off other's nuttiness. Good for him. |
He shares in their nuttiness; a full blown truther he is |
Or so his bagmen would like you to believe. |
Yes that could be case
But I wonder how effective that would be for sales?
It would surely draw the truthers to the novel, but is it really that big of a marketable group of people?
On the other hand, I'm not too sure how this would play out for the general public who still believe the official narrative of 9-11. Would his "coming out as a full blown truther" increase or hurt sales? I bet a logical argument could be made for both sides.
Nonetheless, I'll be buying the novel |
I think a large % of the general public believe they're not being told the whole story. Of course that is no support for the conspiracy theory. That is merely the fallacy of argument by popularity. 1 billion chinese can't be wrong, for example. |
And 45 million Koreans can't be wrong when they warn of killer fans at night.
Still waiting for the thermite chip confirmation......
oh, but Dr. Jones will have an article published in a minstream journal this month. I will surely post a link when it's up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
oh, but Dr. Jones will have an article published in a minstream journal this month. I will surely post a link when it's up. |
I for one won't be waiting up for this "mainstream" journal article to appear  Let me make a prediction:
1) It won't be mainstream.
2) Publication will be delayed for some nebulous reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
oh, but Dr. Jones will have an article published in a minstream journal this month. I will surely post a link when it's up. |
I for one won't be waiting up for this "mainstream" journal article to appear Let me make a prediction:
1) It won't be mainstream.
2) Publication will be delayed for some nebulous reason. |
Care to make a wager? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps we could set some general guidelines defining "mainstream journal" and "article".
Perhaps the wager could be 100$ donated to a charity of the winners choice....
Just a thought.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
Perhaps we could set some general guidelines defining "mainstream journal" and "article".
Perhaps the wager could be 100$ donated to a charity of the winners choice....
Just a thought.... |
The reward is being able to force the other to eat crow.
But you're on the right track. By journal I'm talking a peer reviewed scientific journal. Wiki provides a list of such:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_journals
Wiki also notes these are not to be confused with science magazines. There are many very good science magazines like SciAm, but a professor would get no tenure credit, I believe, for publishing in a science magazine vs a real peer reviewed journal.
So if he publishes an article in, say, the New Scientist I would not consider that satisfactory.
Also, it has to be a real refereed paper. Not a letter.
Now sometimes major science journals let a dissenting voice publish with another paper written by a peer commenting on the short comings of the paper. For example, Behe published in Protein Science (ostensibly why gene duplication is mathematically impossible) with a commentary paper by another scientist showing where Behe made bad assumptions. Also Nature agreed to run an article about homeopathy as long as they agreed to have their methods inspected on site. I still wouldn't consider this kind of special "we'll let you have your say so we're not accused of censorship" type lob as equivalent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
