His location is listed on the ing Facebook page, you dunce. His posts are about concerts happening in Paris. Do you want a picture of him posing with the ing Eiffel Tower or something?
Her post from October 25 talks about an event at Migennes, a city in ing France. On October 3 she made a post about getting a new apartment in the 15th arrondissement of ing Paris. And a few days ago she posted a photo of the two of them together and a friend left her a long message consoling her.
Which you would know if you had one ing ounce of intellectual honesty and actually wanted to find "the truth." But you're just a typical -for-brains conspiratard who couldn't reason his way out of a wet paper bag. Continue on in your delusions.
TranceElevation
Yeah no sherlock, what did you expect them to say? Of course they'll try at least to make it credible. After all they've been payed for that. Unbelievable, you can't find a more blind man than the one who doesn't want to see.
Since you're so desperate about proving the authenticity of those attack please enlighten me about that american student as well which I posted previously. You quickly avoided that.
Vector A
I'm sure correcting every last one of your delusions would take several lifetimes. No thanks.
Anyway, you better watch your step. Maybe I'm just a paid CIA goon, too.
TranceElevation
I see you run. Good.
Mr.Mystery
"They no longer want to speak to me. That must mean I won the argument."
SYSTEM-J
quote:
Originally posted by Vector A
I'm sure correcting every last one of your delusions would take several lifetimes. No thanks.
There is no correcting the self-affirming circular logic of the conspiracy theorist. Any contrary piece of evidence can safely be dismissed as faked, mocked-up or as outright lies, and any credible source dismissed as a bogus expert in league with the conspirators. Meanwhile any item of "proof" raised by a theorist is immediately credible, no matter how vastly illogical or how many obvious holes can be poked in it, simply because it is made by someone "brave enough" to "question everything" in their search for "the truth", unlike the placid "sheep" who argue with it. This self-protective reasoning allows the conspiracy theorist to survive any argument with their all-important sense of smug superiority intact.
What I find amusing is that all conspiracy theorists sound completely identical in these discussions. You could sub out Trance Elevation's posts for those of rubez when he made his daft conspiracy thread months back. The content, tone, style and even the choice of insults are identical. I remember PKC posted this ages ago, but it's lost none of its accuracy:
quote:
10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes
1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.
2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.
4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.
5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.
6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.
7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.
8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.
9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it's “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.
10. It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.
A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore.
soulstar606
quote:
Originally posted by planetaryplayer
isis rhymes with crisis
Isis was the first daughter of Geb, god of the Earth, and Nut, goddess of the Sky, and she was born on the fourth intercalary day. She married her brother, Osiris, and she conceived Horus with him. Isis was instrumental in the resurrection of Osiris when he was murdered by Set. Using her magical skills, she restored his body to life after having gathered the body parts that had been strewn about the earth by Set.
The most extensive account of the Isis-Osiris story known today is Plutarch's Greek description written in the 1st century CE, usually known under its Latin title De Iside et Osiride.[15]
In that version, Set held a banquet for Osiris in which he brought in a beautiful box and said that whoever could fit in the box perfectly would get to keep it. Set had measured Osiris in his sleep and made sure that he was the only one who could fit the box. Several tried to see whether they fit. Once it was Osiris's turn to see if he could fit in the box, Set closed the lid on him so that the box was now a coffin for Osiris. Set flung the box in the Nile so that it would drift far away. Isis went looking for the box so that Osiris could have a proper burial. She found the box in a tree in Byblos, a city along the Phoenician coast, and brought it back to Egypt, hiding it in a swamp. But Set went hunting that night and found the box. Enraged, Set chopped Osiris's body into fourteen pieces and scattered them all over Egypt to ensure that Isis could never find Osiris again for a proper burial.[16][17]
Isis and her sister Nephthys went looking for these pieces, but could only find thirteen of the fourteen. Fish had swallowed the last piece, his phallus. With Thoth's help she created a golden phallus, and attached it to Osiris’s body. She then transformed into a kite, and with the aid of Thoth’s magic conceived Horus the Younger. The number of pieces is described on temple walls variously as fourteen and sixteen, one for each nome or district.
TranceElevation
A great analysis that needs to be shared.
Trance-M
quote:
Originally posted by TranceElevation
A great analysis that needs to be shared.
Great indeed, you found an ever bigger moron as yourself.
The Dutch guy posted a picture at facebook before it started at Bataclan:
you guys are getting way too serious about this...lifes too short for that.
TranceElevation
Of course he would say that. "THE AUTHORITY" convinced him his brother done something really really bad. That same "AUTHORITY" that caught Abdeslam at the border between France and Belgium and "incredibly" released him (no further explanation on the why he was released, although I have an idea). And of course now the movie for the sheeps continues. "A very very bad and mean terrorist is circling around Europe"...boo hooo the specter Boogeyman (ISIS)...we need more WEAPONS to make you feel safe from these bad evil terrorist...yeah average Joe be afraid, live in fear and ask me to PROTECT YOU FROM THE SPECTER WE CREATED!
Gtfoh!
planetaryplayer
its all lizards and reptilian super beings anyone who thinks otherwise is completely mental
