I dont really know where to post this so I thought I would place it here. I wanted to share with people an event that took place yesterday evening
down my local inn between myself and some other people in regards to a conversation about conspiracies and 9/11. I am hoping after people have read
this post they can offer me some form of advice for next time.
So there I was enjoying my drink and conversation with some friends when a guy pitches up at our table, he was a friend of a friend. He started off
the bat talking about different chili ratings (we were eating curry at the time) and he seemed a knowledgeable guy. He was telling us the medicinal
properties of chilis and hot food and the conversation was interesting.
One conversation led to another and before we knew it we were talking about the new apple patent including 'traitorware' nicknamed by the EFF. (one
of the last threads I read yesterday by IRM) He laughed and scoffed openly at me saying that it was completely rubbish and that Apple could not do
such a thing as it would be against privacy laws.
My friend had a mobile phone on him so I went on to google to find the patent. After looking it up and finding the actual patent, first he refused to
look at it saying that it was made up. After a little persuasion he reluctantly looked at it and read it. Paragraph after paragraph he would come out
saying that there is nothing in the patent that suggests that Apple would collect any information. At this point I was getting a little peeved as he
kept skipping past the paragraphs that actually backed up the validity of the argument and arguing that there was nothing in the patent to suggest
that apple were recording details of its users. After he had seen enough he said to me 'your not on of these people that believe that 9/11 was
part of a government conspiracy are you'
. Wow! from then on the conversation heated up!
I am very passionate about 9/11 like many members on this site I have spent hundreds of hours researching 9/11 so I am confident in what I am saying
when I talk about it.
I started off by saying there were irregularities with 9/11 that need to be looked at. He scoffed and went round the table asking people if they
thought 9/11 was an 'inside job' or an 'outside job' (meaning government or Al Queada) everyone said 'outside'. I was getting more and more
angry at this point because these people I frequent my time with are well educated and very intelligent people. They seemed to be goaded on by this
one man. No matter what I said I was always greeted by the same response "Don't believe everything you read on the internet"
patronising way) in the end I almost lost it. Basically this one man managed to turn the whole table in to believeing that everything on the internet
can't be trusted and that there is no evidence to suggest that 9/11 was an inside job
. and even worst all this information is spread around
the net by blogs and that there is absolutely no evidence at all (what a sweeping statement I thought)
I ended up storming off and stopped short of telling everyone to # off, ignorant bastards I thought as I was walking up the road. I went on the PC
afterwards to find out more about skeptical minded people and the way they think. I came across this intersting piece that explainss how the process
or arguing works with these sorts of people www.discord.org...
which is very interesting and fits exactly in to
how this man operated.
I am still annoyed with how everyone acted, basically they did not allow me to complete any
of my sentences without interrupting and they did
not allow me to speak of more than a few of the irregularities that surround 9/11, it was always the same old response when I did 'wheres the
I tried to explain about the thermate being in the rubble to which I was greeted with 'how do you know this' ' don't believe
everything you read on the net'
The reason I stormed off and left the table was the fact that I became insensed with the way that rational sane educated people refused to believe
anything other than what they have read in a newspaper without doing their own research.
Normally I wouldn't have let this get to me because I know its futile, but I suppose its because 9/11 is creeping up and my emotions are still
running high at this time. What I want to know is how do I deal with this kind of skeptical argument.
What do you say to try and educate people in these matters? how can one possibly get their point across if the other party refuses to listen? its so
frustrating and it has effected me quite alot as its constantly on my mind the unfairness of not allowing me to speak.
I have been reading a debate that I found here CHAMPIONSHIP: schrodingers dog vs souls -
"September 11, 2001"
if only these very people that deny the evidence of 9/11 being an inside job would read this debate, maybe just maybe
they would change their minds.
Have you ever been embroiled in a heated discussion with a skeptical minded person, that resulted in being led down the garden path because they
did not let you get your point across
? if so what did you do?
[edit on 27-8-2010 by franspeakfree]