Conspiracy theorists, live by this quote, or you WILL be the crazy person people think you are.

It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

well put. S&F for mr doyle

by the way, i kinda like being the crazy person!

someone has to be a bit surreal.

Originally posted by iSHRED
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

You mean like the government did about 9-11?

reply to post by iSHRED


Yeah, tell me about it. I think we have all put our foot in our mouth too soon at times. We have all been to eager to sign on the dotted line without reading the fine print. Day late and a dollar short. But then, sometimes you have to strike when the iron is hot. One problem is that we often do not have time to consider all the facts and we skim, or the contract is a matter of urgent need, and sometimes we are just plain tricked through the use of a foreign language where the same word of common usage means something very different in the legal usage.

Yes, I have spoken before considering all facts. It's humbling to have to eat crow and retract your words when you find you were wrong. But it's an experience that teaches us. And after all, we should never stop learning.

reply to post by iSHRED

Originally posted by iSHRED
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Data, twist facts? Dont facts contain data, if not, how are they "facts"? It goes without saying that any theory or even an opinion should be fact based. While everyone is entitled to an opinion, all too often they are based on perception and not reality.

I dont agree that its always a "mistake" to theorize. For example, we were told that the the DC Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, committed suicide. I would argue that its not a "mistake" to theorize that she was murdered prior to learning of additional circumstances.

Another thing is to realize that the informational facts that come rolling off of your tongue with an air of authority may be old news to the person that you are trying to enlighten or impress.... It is best that you have your facts straight.

I know im guilty of this as well as probably most of us have been. I'll see somethin on ATS or elsewhere and not look further into it, yet i still believe it and attach later learned facts to the theory even if it is off.

It's in my humble opinion you shouldn't believe anything but keep ideas. Ideas can be altered easier than beliefs. Beliefs take harder lessons to change an opinion. People aren't as likely to pull the trigger for an idea. Beliefs create events like the spanish inquisition.

i like that about ideas not beliefs, its like poker. you get pocket aces and fall in love with the hand. you mentally refuse to fold the hand even if it can no longer win. know when to fold'em

Hmm well I would say that the statement is 100% wrong. The whole of science is based on theorizing first and then looking for data that either supports or refutes your theory until you have proof either way of your theory being correct.

Let us not forget that Mr Doyle was taken in hook line and sinker by some cardboard cut outs of
faeries so I would be careful about taking advice from him

NB in this case I am using theory as it is meant in the normal sense (i.e. "hypothesis") not the scientific sense as if you use it in the scientific sense then the statement in the OP is just a truism

i take it as, if you are set on a theory (conclusion with no support), then build supports as you go, you're gonna have one sloppy building, you'll find data that supports your theory but doesnt fit with other data.

but at the same time you are right as well, you cant really gather random facts and expect to make something of it, you still need to focus your research

never assume data isn't corrupted

reply to post by iSHRED


Everyone does this.

All police are murderers because of this.

What point does this make about people who believe in conspiracy. Everyone does what you say in that quote.

Originally posted by Dumbass
never assume data isn't corrupted

Exactly look how many times they tried to prove evolution with missing links that proved absolute forgeries.

reply to post by andy1033


Exactly the same as humans with their small consciousness rely on some divine texts written by -and- for the same humans with their small consciousness expecting they can perceive truth of reality as a whole.

reply to post by andy1033


Oh by no means would this merely apply to conspiracy theorist. however this is a conspiracy theory website (for the most part) and using this this quote in your theories you would have much stronger arguments

Originally posted by iSHRED
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

You mean like pseudo-skeptics regularly do whenever they're presented with anything that challenges their belief system?

Originally posted by thewholepicture

Originally posted by iSHRED
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

You mean like the government did about 9-11?

No kidding. Someone should tell this to all the people who believe everything the government and media says, too.

Unfortunately most times data can fit multiple patterns, and the kinds of conspiracies we hear about on ATS are far too scant on details. Usually best to leave them as open cold cases until they reach critical mass. If you look hard enough you can find patterns that would support a conspiracy in everything from chess games to beauty pageants. At least on ATS you are free to toss up your latest psychotic episode and see if it is shared.

When you have a theory and find facts/data that might support the theory and all your doing is trying to find stuff to support it and not actually challenge or test the theory, you get stuff like this:

Resurrection of the pheonix

now, that page has good facts, but reading through the whole page is quite rediculous and kinda makes me laugh. it's pretty out there