posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 05:19 AM
The problem here is that the stories are specifically told to suggest there's corroborating evidence.
For example, the West Point story claims Carson met with General Westmoreland, and other Medal of Honor Winners, in Detroit on Memorial Day 1969. And
was subsequently offered a full scholarship to West Point.
In other words, he met with a very famous person, in a specific city, on a specific date. And this led to an tangible offer. This really suggests
we're talking about something factual. Not a tall tale. And it would seem that if you checked these things they'd all line up.
But they don't.
It couldn't have happened on the date and place Carson mentions. The General was in Washington, DC playing tennis that night. And, of course, there
was no tangible offer from West Point.
The same can be said about this "honesty experiment story".
He claims it took place during a specific class at a specific time. And suggests there's corroborating evidence in the form of a photo in the Yale
But not only was no photo ever printed in that paper. Apparently, the class didn't exist either.
This isn't merely the case of a man with a faulty memory of his youth. This is a man who presents stories with elements built in which suggest they
could be corroborated. We are always more likely to believe such stories. Because why would someone lie when such things can easily be checked?
And for quite a while this worked. People believed Carson's stories. But then people started checking. Stuff didn't add up. And now we see that
Carson was, mostly likely, just using a clever technique to make his lies appear truthful. It also appears to be a pattern of behavior. So we
shouldn't be surprised to find that more of his accounts aren't factually accurate.
edit on 9-11-2015 by Moresby because: I was being chased by a Wittle Wee Wee!