Conspiracy Theories et al...

I miss CryBaby's obnoxious, demeaning, insulting, highly entertaining and informative posts.

ill 2nd that

Can't argue with this one.

Wow, a few days away and I miss all the fun...

As the only avowed Pinko-Commie Prepper on these forums; there have been numerous times that I have been offended by all the right-wing, obama-bashing, UN-fearing, Mayan-loving comments but as many have already pointed out; I either put up counter arguments or I ignore that particular thread. I've never ignored a contributor because some of that stuff makes for great sci-fi reading and I love sci-fi.

The issue seems to be that someone has posted something misleading upon which they did not research or consciously tried to mislead. I would suggest that correcting those articles is a job for all of us, not just the moderator. The last thing we want is a newbie losing sleep over cia mosquitoes when there is no evidence such a device is yet possible. Denob cannot be expected to read every thread and correct these people when they post incorrect information either consciously or accidentally. It is the duty for everyone.

If we can create a Fringe Forum, that seems a good solution; I however, would not want to herd those cats! My vote goes to Traveller; his diplomacy and tenderness of fools is known far and wide 😆

If censorship is the only way; then we need some rules because there is a wide margin of beliefs out there...

Almost anything could be Fringe based on your belief systems;
If it mentions FOX news I know that I would be screaming "Fringe" and don't get me started on anything that is released by the Tea Party.
Others would say the same thing about a dude named Jesus, or the evangelical belief in Tribulation(come to think of it; I already insulted Tribulation on a different thread), so I'm probably already on a short-list somewhere.

So, if you must censor, then you must also provide a list of what is Fringe because I don't know anymore. Your example is not about Fringe, it's about someone providing the readers with false or misleading information.

If this turns out to be my last Post; So long and thanks for the fish .

p.s.
I miss CryBaby's obnoxious, demeaning, insulting, highly entertaining and informative posts.

Coming from the Right wing Ayn Rand Worshipper, Sunnewsnetwork groupie......I agree. I can't believe I'm agreeing with a leftist entirely...and I tried to find something in that post I could disagree with...but I can't. 😎 However, I show frustration at all the left wing propoganda I see here on the forums too. lol.

I don't have a problem with someone stating something as opinion...but there is a lot on these forums that are stated as fact...that have no basis whatsoever in fact. Take a look at the Health forums...filled with home remedies or untested/unproven methods or worse taken out of context... no proof (Other than subjective) and yet people profess them as fact, and reference a webpage..(because of course if you have a webpage it is legit.) What is worse, is when others thank them for the information for use. So what has been presented as fact, is now accepted by others. Thats scary.

Lets put whether you "believe" in something aside. Whether you believe in God, Chem Trails, UFO's, Lizard Men, Freemasons taking over the world or the Illuminati, or Smurfs, or whatever...basically harmless. Now if I tell you you should look at getting off your meds and try a "natural" remedy, and here's my reference on these webpages....thats dangerous. Thats effecting someone's well being. The Fringe....thats a polite word for the unproven, the alluring, the possible...but quite possibly not the truth, and quite often nothing more than roaming thoughts reflecting one's own imagination and bias..not fact.

sooo basically anyone says anything that some people differ in opinion from and it is a conspiracy theory... well most of these so called theories have fact to support them. I am not a huge fan of the policies of the left, like dangphool... but that doesnt mean i think he should have his posts deleted. There are many posts on here that ask peoples opinions on things, and i thought being on here would allow people the ability to express those opinions? If someone doesnt like it then don't read it! This is a great site but you may lose more people due to this "censoring" than due to ppl not liking wat ohther ppl have to say... which in my opinion is childish. We are all in the same boat, i think we should be rowing together. To all the ppl that don't like some other peoples opinions, wat will u do when the shtf and u may have to reside with ppl that share different opinions, u going to kick them out? not allow them to speak? Denob is right tho...this is not technically a public forum... but in my opinion this decision is leaving a bad taste in my mouth.

and just an fyi ...the mosquito drone post does have fact behind it... http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/future-drone-surveillance-swarms-cyborg-insect-drones

The mosquito shell loses credability but a humming bird? here are some more mainstream websites that support that it is fact. But I suppose many will only believe it once it is feeding from their digital humming bird feeder. Sure its conspiracy. The point is that just because you dont believe something doesnt make it false or a conspiracy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41837647/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/wings-technology-hummingbird-drones/

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/tech/Nano-Hummingbird-Watches-Everything-116412679.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2161647/Is-really-just-fly-Swarms-cyborg-insect-drones-future-military-surveillance.html

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/30/cia-dragonfly-drone-uavs-40-years/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/flying-robots-nano-quadrotor-drones-swarm_n_1249442.html

Kewl! getting the wings to work is some feat! 4 million for a remote control bird...must be a government project...

I spent 40 bucks at Zellers and got a mini helicopter that has a camera on it. Beware!

does this mean we can still talk about Zombies 😎

There have been some really great posts here and I think it's great that everyone gets a chance to voice their opinion.

That being said, I personally believe that this was a simple categorizing issue. These issues that were being raised were activist issues, not prepper issues. Do I care about chemtrails or drone bugs? Maybe. Can I prep for that? I don't think so.
More importantly, is it censorship to not allow conversations about activist issues on a prepper site?
Think about that for a long time before you answer yes.

There have been some really great posts here and I think it's great that everyone gets a chance to voice their opinion.

That being said, I personally believe that this was a simple categorizing issue. These issues that were being raised were activist issues, not prepper issues. Do I care about chemtrails or drone bugs? Maybe. Can I prep for that? I don't think so.
More importantly, is it censorship to not allow conversations about activist issues on a prepper site?
Think about that for a long time before you answer yes.

So I can make up something, or propose something with bad information and suddenly if it's shot down it's censorship? dude, that doesn't sound right...

You could argue the sky is green....there has to be aline in the sand.

Or....how bout zombies.... 🙂

http://www.kansasantizombiemilitia.com/

Should zombie's have a legit place in "fringe" disucssions too?

There have been some really great posts here and I think it's great that everyone gets a chance to voice their opinion.

That being said, I personally believe that this was a simple categorizing issue. These issues that were being raised were activist issues, not prepper issues. Do I care about chemtrails or drone bugs? Maybe. Can I prep for that? I don't think so.
More importantly, is it censorship to not allow conversations about activist issues on a prepper site?
Think about that for a long time before you answer yes.

Ok so now that the drones are not the conspiracy that it was last week, there is a new reason not to talk about those things..."activist". How is showing what may or may not be used as a threat to people not worth prepping for? EMP protection is a lot more mainstream in the community because heads get together to resolve the threat it poses. Combating tiny drones is a massive task if they were to be used against people (Not necessarily our government but once the USA gets something China is not far to rip off the tech if given the chance). Chemtrails is a tough one since if it is to be found to be dangerous we should find the magic pill to combat that and make it part of our preps. Iodine is to radiation as _____ is to chemtrails.

I guess it is up to the mods to figure out if this site is a leading indicator or a lagging one. Censorship craps all over creativity. Perhaps some of the more mainstream topics would come to life if people were allowed to speak their minds in ALL topics.

Again, if you dont like a topic then leave it alone. If you disagree with something on it then post a reason why (hopefully that just isnt a personal view). Links help with this. Then perhaps more links can be provided to help come to a conclusion without it left hanging due to a topic lockdown. This is a good site with some of the best members I have seen anywhere. No doubt that this cycle will continue because once you add the word 'prepper' in your website, you will attract 'fringe' ideas, info and stories whether you like it or not.

My 2 cents.
I believe a problem develops when people can't or won't distinguish between fact and conjecture. You can take an idea... no matter how improbable... and there can be a factual basis behind it with a proven scientific trail of cause and effect. Other ideas are built on conjecture, faith and belief without any scientific data or information. Bits and pieces can be manipulated to look like science but do not stand the light of day. Regardless one can still believe in it. That is your prorogative and you are free to do so. When it becomes problematic is when those with that faith become the messiah on their chosen topic and preach it as fact. They become fanatical and will not stand any adverse comments and become rabid in their defence. The line I believe that neds to be drawn is this. It is fine to state theory. It is fine to "DISCUSS" theory and possible repercussions. After all, theory is the basis of scientific exploration until the idea becomes proven fact. B U T !!!!!!!!!.... your theory MUST contain factual evidence to back it up and a logical application of those facts. Not just the same drivel espoused in a louder and more agressive manner. You must also be willing to discuss your theory as opposed to preaching it. Tolerant discussion is acceptable. Intolerant preaching is offensive. That I believe is the issue and crux of the problem.

JAB

My 2 cents.
I believe a problem develops when people can't or won't distinguish between fact and conjecture. You can take an idea... no matter how improbable... and there can be a factual basis behind it with a proven scientific trail of cause and effect. Other ideas are built on conjecture, faith and belief without any scientific data or information. Bits and pieces can be manipulated to look like science but do not stand the light of day. Regardless one can still believe in it. That is your prorogative and you are free to do so. When it becomes problematic is when those with that faith become the messiah on their chosen topic and preach it as fact. They become fanatical and will not stand any adverse comments and become rabid in their defence. The line I believe that neds to be drawn is this. It is fine to state theory. It is fine to "DISCUSS" theory and possible repercussions. After all, theory is the basis of scientific exploration until the idea becomes proven fact. B U T !!!!!!!!!.... your theory MUST contain factual evidence to back it up and a logical application of those facts. Not just the same drivel espoused in a louder and more agressive manner. You must also be willing to discuss your theory as opposed to preaching it. Tolerant discussion is acceptable. Intolerant preaching is offensive. That I believe is the issue and crux of the problem.

JAB

Yeah - what JAB said 🙂

Agreed, JAB.

My 2 cents.
I believe a problem develops when people can't or won't distinguish between fact and conjecture. You can take an idea... no matter how improbable... and there can be a factual basis behind it with a proven scientific trail of cause and effect. Other ideas are built on conjecture, faith and belief without any scientific data or information. Bits and pieces can be manipulated to look like science but do not stand the light of day. Regardless one can still believe in it. That is your prorogative and you are free to do so. When it becomes problematic is when those with that faith become the messiah on their chosen topic and preach it as fact. They become fanatical and will not stand any adverse comments and become rabid in their defence. The line I believe that neds to be drawn is this. It is fine to state theory. It is fine to "DISCUSS" theory and possible repercussions. After all, theory is the basis of scientific exploration until the idea becomes proven fact. B U T !!!!!!!!!.... your theory MUST contain factual evidence to back it up and a logical application of those facts. Not just the same drivel espoused in a louder and more agressive manner. You must also be willing to discuss your theory as opposed to preaching it. Tolerant discussion is acceptable. Intolerant preaching is offensive. That I believe is the issue and crux of the problem.

JAB

Not Theories. Hypothesis at best.... This is scary that the two are being mixed up repeatedly in this thread. If we actually kept to these concepts then the problem would largely be resolved. Chem Trails are not a theory. Zombie Apocolypse is not a theory. They are at best...untested Hypothesis. And by taking some facts, (not all) and presenting them in a certain fashion you can come to an untested/unproven conclusion. This doesn't even make it a Theory...

The messiah's aside and the forceful preaching, I'm more concerned at those who fall prey to pseudo science, or pseudo conspiracies, or pseudo health remedies....especially the last one where it directly effects someones well being when they fall for a fancy website, or the such...

People who fall prey to pseudo science, fallacy and fancy websites have no one to blame but themselves. It is for each to do their own due diligence to ensure information they recieve is true and related to their personal situation. People are responsible for themselves. It is not up to us to be the information police and decide what is allowed to be placed on a thread. Again.. once that is started then who is the policeman and who decides the "limits" of what is truth and what is fantasy? Again I will say it isn't... or shouldn't be about WHAT is said or postulated. Rather it should be about the manner in which it is presented and defended. Fiction as opposed to fact.... belief as opposed to scientific truth... preaching as opposed to discussion. Above all respect and tolerance.

JAB