The Conspiracy Argument

ConiectoErgoSum · Post by **ConiectoErgoSum** » Sat Apr 16, 2011 6:32 pm

Let's for a moment assume that modern science and ancient religion are at odds. That they are in fact mutually exclusive. This seems to be a mentality that leads to one of the following arguments:

Creationist:
God's word is specific and perfect.
The bible is God's explicit word.
The bible says that God created all things in a week.
Modern science says that the universe took billions of years to develop.
The two are irreconcilable.
Modern science is wrong.
This argument ends up essentially concluding the following about science:
Modern science is a conspiracy. Modern science is a set of rumors, or memes, initiated by scientists and perpetrated by the gullible. Its medium consists of indoctrination through schools, universities, the media, and word of mouth. It survives because it builds credibility through truths readily observable by everyone - basic physics, the survival instinct, fossil records, animal behavior, etc - and then adds lies that are only observable by "the experts".

Scientist:
The bible, if God's word, if true, would be specific and perfect.
The bible says that God created all things in a week.
Modern science says that the universe took billions of years to develop.
The two are irreconcilable.
The bible is wrong.
This argument ends up essentially concluding the following about Judeo-Christian religion (henceforth referred to as "religion"):
Reliigon is a conspiracy. Religion is a set of rumors, or memes, initiated by ancient politicians/writers and perpetrated by the gullible. Its medium consists of indoctrination through churches, families, the media, and word of mouth. It survives because it builds credibility through truths readily observable by everyone - the often evil nature of humans, the desire to never die, the wisdom of loving your neighbor as yourself - and then adds lies that are only observable by "the priests".

Now I'm sure everyone who thinks this argument is black and white is gonna hate me for reducing it so. I'll just go ahead and admit I didn't get all the details of either argument right. I'm probably way off base. But MY conclusion, is that anyone who believes "Science vs Religion" to be an "either or" - that the two are irreconcilably, mutually exclusive - MUST arrive at the conclusion that there's a conspiracy out there somewhere.

My question is this: How can you say that the evidence you have is not just part of the massive conspiracy? How do you justify believing one conspiracy theory over another?

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:39 pm

Shermana wrote:Yeah, just go dismiss those 60 articles. That works. Your One overview just quickly dismisses them all. Yep. I'll let the reader decide, you can call my argument ridiculous and think the toxicity is nothing. That works.
If you think it is my job to sift through sixty studies to find one that is significant then yes your argument is ridiculous.

You say "What position are you holding at this point"

Right now my position is that you are being intellectually dishonest to the extreme.
Please explain how you've come to this conclusion based on my posts. I will ask again do you believe as your first post on the subject leads us to think that the Nancy Markle hoax is true?

But I'll let the reader decide. I'd like to say something like "Go ahead and eat all the aspartame you want" but I don't want to quite sound malicious.
Don't worry you seem to be doing a good job of that anyways.

And I'm guessing you think the Chinese and Japanese are gullible for believing it too? And the Europeans?
Why would I think that, for that matter where did I even say that about you?

Maybe you just got something against Japanese scientists by your logic.
How do my posts lead you to this conclusion?

Shermana · Post by **Shermana** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:43 pm

You asked me if I had something against British doctors. You also totally ignored that UK Health Report I posted. Why?

Japan bans aspartame.

Simple.

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:44 pm

Shermana wrote:Here we'll start with this one.

http://journals.lww.com/neuroreport/Abs ... DH.23.aspx

Conclusion/Findings: Showed signs of severe cell damage and other neurological events with aspartame.
Not too long ago on another thread you complained about someone using a study in which you had to pay in order to get access to it, but here you are doing that exact same thing. Are you special? Why is it okay for you to do things which is not for others?

Shermana · Post by **Shermana** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:46 pm

Well I figured since they said that all you had to do was post the abstract that it was the acceptable thing to do. I'll sort through the free ones. Try this one.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/116/3/356.short

So why did you ask me if I have something against British doctors but you refuse to comment on the issue of Japan banning it?

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:49 pm

Shermana wrote:You asked me if I had something against British doctors. You also totally ignored that UK Health Report I posted. Why?

Japan bans aspartame.
I asked that because you dismissed what I provided and have still completely ignored it out of hand, the only two conclusions to be made out of such an action is that you automatically dismiss anything from the other side of the argument or that you do not trust British doctors. I on the other hand have not addressed anything about Japanese doctors so it is rather premature to be jumping to conclusions considering you have nothing to go on.

Shermana · Post by **Shermana** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:50 pm

You have IGNORED the issue of the Japanese banning it. You refuse to comment on it for a reason.

I should ask if YOU have something against British doctors since you outright dismissed the UK Health report as if it were nothing.

Try this article. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/116/3/356.short

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:52 pm

Shermana wrote:Well I figured since they said that all you had to do was post the abstract that it was the acceptable thing to do. I'll sort through the free ones.
I'm not a medical researcher so if you could translate what the abstract says into common english that would be greatly appreciated. I will say it again if you will not accept abstracts from others why should we do so from you, it's only fair.

Shermana · Post by **Shermana** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:54 pm

It says it causes Calcium deposits in the brain, which is toxic. Now look at the other link I just posted and explain why you think Japan banned it, did they just fall for the hoax?

And here's another link to a full 22 page study.

http://thetruthaboutstuff.com/pdf/%2847 ... thanol.pdf

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 3:02 pm

Try this article. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/116/3/356.short

From the conclusion of this report.

The significance of our findings in pre
dicting aspartame's effects on humans is
unclear.

Shermana · Post by **Shermana** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 3:09 pm

Add the rest so people can see why its unclear. They are being conservative and honest in regards to Tyrosine data skewing.

And don't be too obvious that you're absolutely avoiding the issue of you going against the opinion of Japan's doctors.