GeekNights 070517 - Crackpot Conspiracy Theories

Rym

Tonight on GeekNights, we talk about those crackpot conspiracy nuts. In the news, something happened in basketball, and there's a ruckus over a judge who doesn't know what a web page is.

Scott's Thing - Five Greatest Sculptors
Rym's Thing - Crazy Conspiracy Nut #978

tuttle88

I shall go download it right now. I love me some conspiracy theories. I just spent $2 on 'The Prime Minister was a Spy' which is all about how Harold Holt didn't drown he was working for the Chinese and they picked him up in a submarine and took him to China. This book has exactly zero references and is based largely on what an anonymous source told the author. This anonymous source spent several years trying to get his own book about Holt published but no one wanted it.

Railith

That youtube video can be turned into a masterwork of literature by adding the phrase "who have hired Goglo 13 to kill" at key points during the video.

I'd like to believe in ghost and stuff, but sadly I'm too smart.

rhinocero

That was a pretty great episode. I really think you should do the "freak the conspiracy experts" plan, but you have to be sure not to overplay it. Like, if you do the thing where one of you runs by and the other impersonates an agent, they'll probably figure you're messing with them. You have to talk to them a little, explain it, then leave. If the documents look official enough they will believe them.

Also - you said it's impossible to prove conspiracy nuts wrong because they are irrational. I don't think that's the case. The reason is because you are trying to prove a negative - you are trying to prove that a conspiracy does not exist. And you can't do that. Of course, it doesn't help that they're totally fucking crazy.

Also the Swiss government secretly controls the world. They have advanced technology, including UFOs and gene-splicing equipment which they have used to create Loch Ness monster, little green men, werewolves, etc. They also control the monetary supply of the entire world.

Exarion

Parody of conspiracy theorists
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07

HMTKSteve

fnord.

CHOIS CHOIS CHOIS

Ha,lol
Only geeknights can talk about this, only geeknights.

CHOIS CHOIS CHOIS

It's a Government conspiracy man! There trying to silence me by assassinating me! (Gunshot)
...........................
(Silence)

N15PCA

I really like the Phoenix suns and because of this ruling the suns lost game five and now it 3-2 in the Spurs favor. I going to post what I wrote on my blog from gamespot. This is a second round of the NBA play-offs. Their are no more first round best of five games anymore. Their are all best of seven and their are four rounds. Basketball is a great game. It's number two sport behind soccer in the world.

I don't disagree with the call by stern to suspended Stoudemire and Diaw for one game because it's the rules, but what about when Duncan came from the sidelines onto the court by three feet in the first half. That's ok? I don't get that one. If your going to do one you have to do the other. I also think Horry should got suspended for one game. They only did that because STAT and Diaw got suspended for one game. Maybe in the off-season they did to go back and change the rules on this one. They should put it has type one or type two rule. I also think that they should suspended STAT for game six and not for game five and Diaw for game five. That would have been fair. A show hands everyone. Wouldn't you go from the bench to see if you teammate is ok if he was hip check into the sidelines. Your two time MVP teammate at that.

The only conspiracy I believe in is the death of JFK. All the other one's like the moon landing are just bogus.

Jason

It's very sad -- we get a lot of people in my office presenting elaborate conspiracy theories. Many of them (but not all) are obviously mentally ill, and it becomes difficult (on a couple of occasions dangerous) to deal with them.

MagL33To

I don't think I've ever laughed so much at an episode of Geeknights! I loved it :D

(Especially after having just watched the scientology panorama episode. Those guys are freaky...)

Starfox

Steve, I don't get your post. I can't see anything in it, why didn't you say anything?

Victor Frost

Rym, Scott, I will make you some crazy conspiracy documents. How many pages would you like? Any content or governmental branches you had in mind?

tuttle88

Notice Scott didn't say anything about all the Jew conspiracies? Coincidence? Or is he part of the Zionists who run the media...

Mamath

Steve, I don't get your post. I can't see anything in it, why didn't you say anything?

WIKIPEDIA FOR PRESIDENT!

Apreche

Notice Scott didn't say anything about all the Jew conspiracies? Coincidence? Or is he part of the Zionists who run the media...That's because the Jew conspiracies are real. We own Hollywood, Wall Street, and Washington, and there's not a got-damn thing you can do about it.

In all seriousness, if you want to learn the real history behind the anti-semitic conspiracies, it's pretty interesting. Basically, there is a book called The Secret Protocols of the Elders of Zion which has spawned most conspiracy theories about Jews running the world. Even today there are people reading this old, and obviously false, book and believing it. Will Eisner, god of comics, wrote a historical graphic novel called The Plot. It tells the story about how the conspiracy book came to be, the harm it still causes to this day, and how just about everything in the book is lies. I don't suggest you actually read the actual Protocols, they are pretty stupid. I highly recommend you read The Plot. Heck, it's Will Eisner, you can't go wrong.

Erwin

Will Eisner is awesome, is there anything else to say?

HMTKSteve

So, have the Vegas odds-makers put out a statement yet about the basketball news?

Jason

HungryJoe

Once you know about a few conspiracy theories, it's easy to see conpiracies everywhere.

For instance, isn't it a little "coincidence" that GWB turned up sick right after he went round and round with Putin about the missile silos? How easy is it to think that Vlad slipped some Polonium in GWB's soup?

HungryJoe

Federal and state criminal law recognizes the existence of conspiracies. Does that mean that prosecutors who bring conspiracy indictments are crackpot conspiracy theorists?

Jason

You're using another logical fallacy of equivocation to say that all conspiracies fall into the crazy crackpot conspiracy label. You've been using a lot of logical fallacies in your arguments lately. What gives? Surely you don't get away with those cheap shots in court....

HungryJoe

You're using another logical fallacy of equivocation to say that all conspiracies fall into the crazy crackpot conspiracy label. You've been using a lot of logical fallacies in your arguments lately. What gives?

As far as I remember, equivocation is where someone tries to ascribe different or misleading meanings to a term in a statement. For instance, "A woman doesn't need to fear a man-eating tiger." That's not what I'm doing. The "crackpot conspiracy theory" and a criminal conspiracy both concern agreements between two or more persons to perform some action or engage in some conduct. The only difference is that the "crackpot conspiracy" cannot be proven. All "crackpot conspiracies" are conspiracies, but not all conspiracies are "crackpot conspiracies"

I'm concerned with a tendency I'm seeing in both the real world and this board to consider any possible conspiracy a "crackpot conspiracy" or even an act, statement, or omission of one person to be a "conspiracy theory" like in this comment.

It's okay to knock "crackpot conspiracy theories" and make fun of them. I justdon't want to see "conspiracy" confused with "crackpot conpiracy theory."

Surely you don't get away with those cheap shots in court....

Court argument shares some, but by no means all, aspects of graded debate. My job is to persuade. If I can do it by using an argument that would lose me points on debate squad, I'll do it. Many people are persuaded by fallacies, and fallacies aren't always disallowed in court.

Starfox

Edit: D'oh! Wrong thread!

Jason

If you argue in court from a fallacy, aren't you defrauding the court?

HungryJoe

No. You don't lie, but you throw out what arguments you have. I can tell you from experience that when you have a defendant that won't plea and has a terrible story, you can really scrape the bottom of the barrel of bad arguments.

I had this guy once who shoved a broken bottle into another guy's neck. He nearly killed him. He wouldn't plead to anything and wanted to go to trial even though any sane person would understand that he was a had lad.

Now before he shoved the bottle in (in front of witnesses), he yelled "I'm gonna kill you fags!" The victim and his witnesses were all pretty faggy. I actually said to the jury, "He wasn't necessarily talking about these particular fags." I couldn't resist.

Jason

But if you're providing fallacious information in the form of an argument, then according to your definition in the other thread, aren't you lying?

HungryJoe

But if you're providing fallacious information in the form of an argument, then according to your definition in the other thread, aren't you lying?

I didn't define anything. Steve did.

Even if I did, I was talking about facts. A person can weave a fallacious argument out of perfectly true facts. The only thing that matters is whether the argument is persuasive.

HungryJoe

No. Should I?

Jason

If you are making a fallacious argument with true facts for the purpose of pursuading a jury, isn't that a lie according to your assertions in the other thread?

Jason

0.0

Dear lawd. I hope you're getting overtime.