Skeptic Project

I have finally managed to work (and complete) a new blog. The subject of this blog goes back from a few months, you might all remember it.

I've decided to respond to these people, because, quite frankly, I was bored.

Read the article here.


Feel free to discuss the article here, or what I could add to make it better.

Well I got to it (finally) and I must admit, it's really good.

Some things I'd just like to add to the discussion, not necessarily the post itself:

Quote from Infowarrior_039
Indeed the majority of things INFOWARS, Alex Jones and other truth seekers talk about is well sourced, well researched, and based from the most accurate source available.

Pretty sure this thread shows just how "well sourced" Alex Jones really is. He is notorious for distorting sources.
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5027/infowars-fail/

Also, http://skepticproject.com/site/faq/, number 18 "Why do you use mainstream sources?". It is also funny how Alex Jones criticizes mainstream media for being fake or not real news yet constantly uses them.

Quote from Infowarrior_039
The problem with skeptics and "debunkers" of truth seekers like Alex Jones and others is that no matter what, something we have said or done is wrong, or currently inaccurate based on the information that is publicly available, and therefore nothing we say has any value because we have "no idea what we are talking about". These skeptics hurl attacks on truth seekers, caught up in their quest to prove us all wrong, become exactly what they are accusing us of. Indeed expect for the very few mistakes or misunderstandings we may have made, they offer very little evidence or proof that they have a better idea, a better understanding or explanation, nor do we have any solid proof or evidence that backs our claims.

I don't understand. Based on current information CT'ers don't know what they're talking about and we don't either? If we're the ones that understand the current information I think we should be the ones that know what we're talking about. As for better understandings/explanations, I think we do give better explanations when we prove their whole ideas as wrong and incorrect. Usually the CT'ers are the ones stating that the current explanations are false such as with the Boston Marathon Bombings, 9/11, UN, etc. etc. so it is on them to prove that what is currently known or understood is false. Since they can't and don't, I think we uphold that the current understandings/explanations are valid.

He mentioned something about us not believing in conspiracies which is also false:
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5183/turns-out-the-government-sachs-conspiracy-theorists-were-ri/
we do accept conspiracies, but conspiracies =/= NWO etc.


Nice job on the entry btw, and I do appreciate the quote from me.