reply to post by projectvxn
Actually I would say the main problem with conspiracy theories is they place blame without evidence.
Are you to deny that if possible, people in this world with power would not want to do those things?
Are you to deny that if possible, people would fake an alien invasion for power?
Are you to deny that if possible, people would at the same time, try to hide aliens for their own power?
And so on.
There are in fact people who would want to do these things if they could. And the only thing that stops them is people being aware of the
possibilities. That means question everything. If they are not doing bad things, then what is to hide? It is the peoples privacy that is
important, not what the leaders are doing.
This secrecy leads to unanswered questions, and the result of it is people will start to fill in the blanks themselves. And the people with the
answers who keep them in secret will always be blamed, and rightly so as they are atleast in part responsible.
And no doubt, as a way of keeping secrets, disinformation arises that leads people into make wrong assumptions. By putting out a lie on a topic,
you are able to keep the real truth hidden - whatever it may be.
As for science, meh. Science is flawed from the start. It ignores consciousness and any effects it may have on things. In evolution, it's just
considered to be "random", which pretty much slaps in the face of the whole "well it can be repeated in a lab". Except randomness does not
actually exist. A computer can not even truly generate a random number - fact. Not that I completely disagree with evolution, just that it and
science in general ignore it, and ridicule anything which includes it.
The only thing science has ever had going for it is that can be changed.
Theories in science are formed in the exact same way conspiracy theories are formed. By taking the information available and looking for logical
outcomes. If new information comes out, theories change. If bad data comes into science, the data will be flawed, just as if the data comes into
conspiracy the data gets flawed.
And how would you like it if all of science were judged based solely on the parts where science has been wrong? Or based on a single scientist who
makes a claim.
Even if the conspiracy is wrong, the patterns and possibilities it relies on are for the most part right, and things which should in fact be watched
for. Only an alert public would ever be able to stop such things, and your post and that attitude does nothing by try to get people to sleep on the
topic.