CureZone   Log On   Join
Re: Chemtrails
 
Ohfor07 Views: 1,135
Published: 18 y
 
This is a reply to # 739,471

Re: Chemtrails


I read your reply and it put me to thinking......yeah, dangerous, I know ;) But this thinking lead me to a question..... actually, a series of questions.


There are probably many topics that the same questions can equally be applied to. As far as this goes, chemtrails is among them but likely to be way down on the list compared to others, especially (but not limited to) ones that have been out there a lot longer. Pearl Harbor/WWII, and JFK come to mind of those that have probably been out there longer. 911 and WACO are probably good examples of ones that may not have been out there as long but are possibly much higher on the list than chemtrails. Regardless, the series of question seems reasonable no matter where a given topic may be on this so-called list.

It's fair to say that each of the topics mentioned above can be loosely grouped as "conspiracy" topics, or in other words, topics for which there are two main sides. On one side, there is the establishment view, on the other side, there is the conspiracy view that is in opposition to the establishment view. Pick any of the above topics, throw a dart if you like, and ponder this. It doesn't even matter which side you presently weigg in on, the questions apply to both sides. First ask the question as it may apply to just yourself - one person, but then try to ask the same question as it may apply to a whole bunch of people coming to agreement on the answer to the same question.

1) What, in anybody's mind, would it take for either view/side of this topic to be credible? Are you, as an individual, the type to be in anyway swayed by what other people tell you regarding the matter? First try to answer these from the your perspective of being just a single, individual person looking to be convinced on a given topic. If you can get past this point, then try to expand the question to apply from the perspective of a whole bunch of people..... for sake of argument, think of "whole bunch" as anwywhere from more than 1 all the way up to the ephemeral "public at large" and or "the masses" and or "the majority".

2) What kinds of sources do you suspect would be required to convince you as the individual? The example sources started out as two people - one of them a CZ poster who reported a substantive conversation with a long-time military dude who, as a result of the conversation, eventually came to the condition of confiding something they apparently know about a topic that may not be already generally known by the average person.

3) How, in the first place, does a source of information come into the situation of being thought of as credible? In other words, what makes them credible? Are there tangible, concrete aspects invovled?; or is this more a matter of the intangible, for instance, popularity..... or pressure.......or perhaps a really effective campaign that puts great effort into making a source or sources appear "credible"?

4) At any point in thinking about these questions, did the urge or inkling arise anything to the effect of "gee, to be truly honest, I REALLY don't know FOR SURE what the answer is, maybe I oughta punt and try to blend in with the crowd, at least this way, I still don't know but maybe not many other people will notice....besides, there is safety in numbers, isn't there?"?

 

 
Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend
Alert Moderators
Report Spam or bad message  Alert Moderators on This GOOD Message

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


 

Donate to CureZone


CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with https://www.netatlantic.com


Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2024  www.curezone.org

0.078 sec, (2)