From: Jeff Dee (jeff@illusionmachines.com)
Date: Mon Sep 23 1996 - 09:48:53 MDT
>From: Ian Goddard
> At 10:46 AM 9/18/96 -0600, Ira Brodsky wrote:
> >Forwarded by Peter James:
> >
> >> TWA flight 800 was SHOT DOWN by a US NAVY AEGIS MISSILE
> >
> >This sounds like the recent "anti-gravity" experiments. <g>
>IAN: Of course the missile theory sounds like "anti-gravity"
>experiments, because, like anti-gravity, everybody knows that
>missiles could never fly across the sky, much less hit a plane
>-- why it's patently absurd.
Obviously, they were not comparing the relative likelihood of
missiles being able to fly vs. anti-gravity devices working. They
were comparing the relative likelihood of our government going
to all this trouble to cover up *this* specific accident (when we
all know there have been accidents before, some pretty major,
which were *not* covered up) vs. the likelihood that the
government is funding ridiculously goofy research. Your
criticism of an analogy which was not the intended one does
little to support your case.
>It seems that over 100 crazy people had a spontaneous group
>hallucination in New York on the night the plane went boom.
>The Washington Times (07/24/96) reported about these crazies:
> Several eyewitnesses, including an Air National
> Guard pilot flying in the area when the explosion
> occurred, have told the FBI they saw a bright,
> flare-like object streaking toward the jumbo jet
> seconds before it blew up. ABC News said yesterday
> that the investigators had more then 100 eyewitness
> accounts supporting the theory. ^^^
>Can you imagine that, 100 crazy conspiratorial people attacking
>the truth-meme, which is that missiles can't fly or hit planes.
The 'truth meme' that was referred to is not that 'missiles can't fly'.
It wasn't even that 'the government didn't do it'. The truth meme
that (Ira Brodsky?) referred to was the 'truth' that they *did* do it.
(Ira's?) point was that if the government *is* covering this up, that
means that the truth meme of their *involvement* is weak, since they
appear to be getting away with the 'coverup'.
As to whether we can imagine 100 people being mistaken in unison,
the answer is yes. It happens all the time.
>What is more, there is a bad conspiratorial radar out there that
>is also a dangerous threat to the truth-meme:
> Associated Press 07/19/96
> There were reports that radar detected a blip
> merging with the jet shortly before the explosion,
> something that could indicate a missile hit.
Again, the point that was being made was that, if there *is* a
coverup going on, then that coverup must be stronger than the 'truth'
of what happened... *particularly* if there's all this incontravertable
evidence lying around. Your attack on something other than what
was actually said does not support your case.
And is it really necessary to point out that 'reports of something that
could indicate something' are *not* incontravertable evidence?
>Thank the truth-meme that some secret pentagon officials stopped the
>testimony of that conspiratorial radar -- the AP story continues:
> But Pentagon officials, speaking on condition of
> anonymity, said government analysts have studied
> several radar reports of the area and the blip
> was found to be a spurious signal.
>I am glad we can rely on our secret govt agents to stand up for
>truth when those bad "spurious" radars and witnesses get out of
>hand and threaten the truth-meme.
Again, you're attacking the idea that the 'government conspiracy' is
what was meant by the 'truth meme', and that 'facts' are what the
'truth meme' is triumphing over. This is entirely backward from
what was said.
By the way, are you now denying that radar ever yields spurious
signals? Is radar infallible?
> >If true (I mean the missile story) it would be terrible news for
> >extropians, because it would suggest that the truth is a very weak meme.
>IAN: Wow, this sort of says it all: If the missile theory is true,
>then the truth-meme is weak.
Yes. Because that would mean that the truth (missiles) is
being defeated by the lies (coverup), since the missile story is
*not* being widely accepted - the supposed 'coverup' is
*winning*.
>So it's preordained that there can only
>be one variety of truth even if it's false, and that truth must be
>that the a missile could never have hit TWA flight 800.
That is not anything like what (Ira?) was implying.
>I'd say this line of reasoning is a threat to the truth.
It certainly is. Luckily, you are only imagining that anyone
was suggesting that line of reasoning.
>The only
>"truth meme" is logical thinking. The only truth is what is.
Absolutely. Unfortunately, what 'is' is not always easy to
determine. People, even large groups of people, have been
known to be mistaken simultaneously. Radar *can* give
spurious readings. Governments *can* conspire to keep
their people from finding out about embarrasing plots and
accidents. And perfectly well-intentioned people can get
so emotionally attached to their favorite theory that they'll
flagrantly misrepresent anyone who disagrees with them.
-Jeff Dee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:45 MST