Saturday, May 18, 2013

Considering conspiracies

Chem trails, fluoridation, vaccines, GMOs- these are some of the conspiracy theories that I am highly doubtful about.

I'm not saying that those in government/corporations wouldn't harm people for their own evil purposes- just that I'm not convinced that these are examples of that being put into action.

I don't denigrate those who pursue the exposure of their particular conspiracy- it's just that I wonder if more important things are being ignored while focusing on these.

I can't go through life terrified that everything I eat, breathe, drink, or do is killing me, and trying desperately to avoid exposure to all those things.  That doesn't mean the theories aren't true, of course.  Life is a fatal condition, and people do seem to be living longer today than they did 100 years ago before any of those things were around.  Maybe that trend will reverse because of all the conspiracy issues listed above.  Maybe that trend will reverse due more to socialized medicine.

If the evidence is ever sufficient to convince me... well... I'm not sure what I'd do because those things are things I am not in a position to do anything about other than complain or get completely stress-ridden over.  And I don't need to stress myself out over things I am not convinced are real, or are a real problem.  There are too many other things I can do something about.



  1. I'd reconsider that view Kent. Just because you don't want to think about a problem doesn't mean it isn't an attack on your health and or liberty. Just saying.

  2. I did say "That doesn't mean the theories aren't true, of course."

    But everytime I do my own research into one of the above conspiracies, they fall far short of the proof needed to convince me. And, no, I don't mean just reading what other people have to say on the issues, but doing my own thinking and studying. The claims of those who see a conspiracy use flawed information, flawed logic, incorrect assumptions, and- usually- bad science. When this has been my experience every time I look at the latest claim, eventually I get to the point where I don't care to jump at every new revelation.

  3. A conspiracy theory would entail the knowing and, I might say, illegal activities of two or more people. The fluoridation, GMO and vaccine issues are not conspiracy theories. There are credible scientists who believe these issues are either beneficial or any harm is negligble. However, there is much research out there showing that fluoride in our water, GMO foods, and vaccines actaully cause more harm that any good they were supposed to create.

    Autism and autism-related problems have escalated in the recent decades as have immune deficiency diseases. This is not an accident or a case of better reporting.

    If you would check with GreenMedInfo, Dr. Mercola, and The Weston A. Price Foundation for starters you can find much information about these issues... the negative impact of them on individuals and the population as a whole.

    As to living longer, we are living longer today because of medical intervention. And if you do some research you will find that many people of ancient times did live into their 70's, 80's, and 90's. They tended to be the people who had enough food to eat, got a goodly amount of exercise, weren't worked to death, and were lucky enough to avoid or survive diseases we can prevent with medical intervention today.

  4. The use of the term "theory" in connection with conspiracy is a form of intellectual blackmail. That in itself amounts to conspiracy. Like the overused term "denier". A "denier" is one who doubts a dominant social theme designed to create group think (collectivism). The "denier" -- is universally accused of being of the extremist - fringe, nut-case "ilk" (another conspiracy word -- I would never belong to an "ilk"; only "they" would so belong. And perhaps thee).

    How dare you deny this or that, which is common and verified and unquestionably ("scientifically") proved "...beyond the doubt of any thinking person..." (more intellectual blackmail) ... and all opposition "debunked" (another conspiratorial term presented to quash dispute).

    Most of us who write from the point of view of one school or another are guilty of conspiracy without admitting it. We couch (and conspire with each other to couch) virtually every thought to further our agenda, never considering the possibility we ourselves may be engaging in the thing of which we accuse others.

    "Libertarians" are often caught up in the quest to "win" others to our way of thinking -- "To-Freedom". So we conspire to present almost any event from the perspective of what we think is "freedom". And in the process we argue among ourselves -- which is healthy in order to whet our thinking -- but can obscure reality.

    Everything I know that did not come from personal experience is "theory". I'm a history teacher. I believe many events we know as "history"; but I don't believe or accept whole-hog anymore lots of the stuff I used to teach with an air of dogmatism. Of late I'm being called upon to believe a lot of what is called "revisionist history" -- the recognition that events of the past have been largely arranged to convince the hoi polloi that they are being ruled " consent of the governed..."

    I wasn't there. So in reality I have to accept the possibility that I've been duped into believing and repeating many, many lines of bull-shit in my adult lifetime -- and taught a lot of crap that today I recognize as total obfuscation.

    I'll quit with that for now.