Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
There are many patterns I accept. Natural selection, even numbers, getting chicken pox after being around someone who is sick. The pattern I see here is exactly what I am pointing out. I see a theory which can not be falsified, makes as many assumptions as needed to reach it's conclusion, makes use of interchangeable agency, and is capable of turning any counter-evidence into evidence via the conspiracy. This pattern is self evident and does not require any twists of logic or tricks of mentality to be apparent.Heis, you bring up that argument a lot. Not to say it doesn't have any bearing, but it seems like it can be applied to you as well. The pattern of never accepting patterns.
And why do I find the masonic "Compass and Square" in Handy Manny cartoons? Look honestly at the symbols shown in these videos, and then go watch Disney TV. The proof is in the pudding.
Playing the "conspiracy theorist" card doesn't say much to me.
Just to avoid some strawmen, lets be clear on what I am not saying.
I am not saying conspiracies don't take place. They happen all the time and look very different than 'conspiracy theories'. The difference is, these conspiracies are vulnerable to the tools of thorough investigation.
I am not saying rich and powerful people do not get together and conspire against those they see as underlings.
I am not saying secrets are never kept from the public.
What I am saying is that the evidence I see presented in the vid (I only watched the first 20 min part) can easily be accounted for by the alternative explanations I posted. I also asked a reasonable question of how we distinguish benign coincidence from intentional malice. I do not think these are ridiculous standards to expect from an investigation. Rudimentary critical analysis is a staple of any research which seeks to deliver accurate answers, it's hardly 'playing the conspiracy card'.
As for why you find symbols in Disney cartoons and such, I think that is a illegitimate question to ask. My problem is not with the inquiry, but with the conclusion the vid posits, and that problem is simply that it is poorly reasoned speculation pretending to be considerable evidence.