MH370 did NOT disappear. OP/ED

[Brian37]

Brian, I have no idea how you got that I was directing that comment at you.

Wasn't claiming you were. I was making a general statement.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't think she's uncomfortable with word-choices, but rather, with the ugly tenor of the conversation. I did my best to be polite. Others, not so much.

[Brian37]

I don't think she's uncomfortable with word-choices, but rather, with the ugly tenor of the conversation. I did my best to be polite. Others, not so much.

Parker, no one is owed politeness. The only people on this website who make the rules are the owners and admins. Outside this private website in the real world no one is free from being offended.

The bigger picture worldwide in our species history is we collectively need a priority shift away from insisting on taboos and walking on eggshells. I do not like the attitude that you can force 7 billion humans to only say nice things all the time.

The civil thing to do is to accept your own comfort level and if someone bothers you that much, ask, but if they don't respond the way you wish, counter, or walk away. But once you have a knowledge of someone's history and you still chose to engage them, it is a bit absurd to expect that other person to conform to you.

Forced politeness is why cartoonists get murdered. I would like to think the west doesn't have to become that to keep the peace.

Now as far as private websites, here and everywhere else, it is really easy to control what you click on and read. Point being, you are responsible for you, no one else. Asking is fine but after that it is on you once you know the history of the other person.

[Mudhammam]

You are stupidly insisting the government would not want people to know the truth.

Was this intended to be a serious statement?

[Brian37]

You are stupidly insisting the government would not want people to know the truth.

Was this intended to be a serious statement?

JFK conspiracy logic works like Ouija Boards and god claims. Everyone is in on it because snarfwidgets did it. It amounts to the same gap filling because the mundane is not sexy.

The plane was not hijacked and landed safely, that would take too many people to pull that off. At best maybe someone, even the pilot could have gone off the deep end. But the data we have now is pointing to a weather and or mechanical issue causing the pilots to deviate from the flight plan, put the plane on auto pilot, loss of cabin pressure, plane continues on until it runs out of fuel, crashes into the ocean.

I could care less if you cant accept the mundane. 50 years after the fact this crap is really no different than claiming George Washington Chopping down the cherry tree. Oswald acted alone. The conspiracies have been debunked over and over and over. Oswald was merely a disturbed individual combined with lack of security. No conspiracy, just conditions.

[Mudhammam]

Was this intended to be a serious statement?

JFK conspiracy logic works like Ouija Boards and god claims. Everyone is in on it because snarfwidgets did it. It amounts to the same gap filling because the mundane is not sexy.

The plane was not hijacked and landed safely, that would take too many people to pull that off. At best maybe someone, even the pilot could have gone off the deep end. But the data we have now is pointing to a weather and or mechanical issue causing the pilots to deviate from the flight plan, put the plane on auto pilot, loss of cabin pressure, plane continues on until it runs out of fuel, crashes into the ocean.

I could care less if you cant accept the mundane. 50 years after the fact this crap is really no different than claiming George Washington Chopping down the cherry tree. Oswald acted alone. The conspiracies have been debunked over and over and over. Oswald was merely a disturbed individual combined with lack of security. No conspiracy, just conditions.

I don't really have an opinion on the JFK shooting and I don't care much to form one, but I just thought your argument that the government wouldn't lie or have the means to do something such as that utterly hilarious.

[Brian37]

JFK conspiracy logic works like Ouija Boards and god claims. Everyone is in on it because snarfwidgets did it. It amounts to the same gap filling because the mundane is not sexy.

The plane was not hijacked and landed safely, that would take too many people to pull that off. At best maybe someone, even the pilot could have gone off the deep end. But the data we have now is pointing to a weather and or mechanical issue causing the pilots to deviate from the flight plan, put the plane on auto pilot, loss of cabin pressure, plane continues on until it runs out of fuel, crashes into the ocean.

I could care less if you cant accept the mundane. 50 years after the fact this crap is really no different than claiming George Washington Chopping down the cherry tree. Oswald acted alone. The conspiracies have been debunked over and over and over. Oswald was merely a disturbed individual combined with lack of security. No conspiracy, just conditions.

I don't really have an opinion on the JFK shooting and I don't care much to form one, but I just thought your argument that the government wouldn't lie or have the means to do something such as that utterly hilarious.

UGGGGGGG, politicians lie, thanks for the update. Not talking about that. I am talking about the TOTALITY of the data in the case of JFK. You are staring at my fingertip while I am pointing at the moon.

I am sure JFK's murder was embarrassing to the government. But so were the security breaches the White House has seen under Obama. Still no conspiracy, but conditions.

Selection bias and sample rate error and gap filling is why conspiracy theories pop up. That was my point. The more people involved in ANY crime the harder it will be to keep it under wraps. If the plane had been hijacked and landed safely we would know by now, just like Boca Haram, no we have not found them yet, but we know that unicorns didnt do it.

Same with JFK. You don't have help with something like that without it coming out eventually. Oswald certainly liked communist ideology, but just like the Boston Bombers, Oswald was a lone wolf who merely tried to make a name for himself.

[Mudhammam]

I don't really have an opinion on the JFK shooting and I don't care much to form one, but I just thought your argument that the government wouldn't lie or have the means to do something such as that utterly hilarious.

UGGGGGGG, politicians lie, thanks for the update. Not talking about that. I am talking about the TOTALITY of the data in the case of JFK. You are staring at my fingertip while I am pointing at the moon.

I am sure JFK's murder was embarrassing to the government. But so were the security breaches the White House has seen under Obama. Still no conspiracy, but conditions.

Selection bias and sample rate error and gap filling is why conspiracy theories pop up. That was my point. The more people involved in ANY crime the harder it will be to keep it under wraps. If the plane had been hijacked and landed safely we would know by now, just like Boca Haram, no we have not found them yet, but we know that unicorns didnt do it.

Same with JFK. You don't have help with something like that without it coming out eventually. Oswald certainly liked communist ideology, but just like the Boston Bombers, Oswald was a lone wolf who merely tried to make a name for himself.

I'm not saying I think there is good reason to doubt your conclusion, just that the defense you're giving sounds a bit naive. How many people would have to be in collusion to pull something like that off? 5? 10? 20? Why would the truth necessarily come out? What motive would there be for any involved to implicate themselves when the "alleged" killer is dead?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't think she's uncomfortable with word-choices, but rather, with the ugly tenor of the conversation. I did my best to be polite. Others, not so much.

Parker, no one is owed politeness. The only people on this website who make the rules are the owners and admins. Outside this private website in the real world no one is free from being offended.

The bigger picture worldwide in our species history is we collectively need a priority shift away from insisting on taboos and walking on eggshells. I do not like the attitude that you can force 7 billion humans to only say nice things all the time.

The civil thing to do is to accept your own comfort level and if someone bothers you that much, ask, but if they don't respond the way you wish, counter, or walk away. But once you have a knowledge of someone's history and you still chose to engage them, it is a bit absurd to expect that other person to conform to you.

Forced politeness is why cartoonists get murdered. I would like to think the west doesn't have to become that to keep the peace.

Now as far as private websites, here and everywhere else, it is really easy to control what you click on and read. Point being, you are responsible for you, no one else. Asking is fine but after that it is on you once you know the history of the other person.

No one is arguing for forced courtesy. Her criticism, and it was apt, was that the exchange between Gawdzilla and myself quickly devolved into something both insubstantive and rude. Had he actually bothered to reply with substance, the rudeness probably would have been tolerable, because the discussion would at least have had some depth.

My understanding of it was that extraneous rudeness, with no redeeming factors, was shitting up the thread, and she's right. I tried to keep it substantive, but then bit at what should have been obvious as a wind-up.

It's all good. I won't make that mistake with him again.

[Brian37]

Parker, one thing about all social media, very few websites have a ratings system. I do see websites like this one that partition the library from the boxing ring. Paltalk allowed you the owner of the room to set a rating to it so that way everyone knew what they were getting into. I find it hard on boards for the admins to please everyone all the time, they do the best they can.

Other boards have the same format as this one. I don't think the way the code works on this one you could pull it off. But I've always wanted to see a user control panel setting, not just here, but even on FB and Twitter, where when someone sees your page or posts you have "G" or "PG" or "R" or "boxing ring" setting, then have a filter as to your comfort level.

But I can tell you in all of my history of posting on multiple boards over a 14 year period even if you use G rated words the mere challenge to someone's position will be taken as a "fuck you".

EXAMPLE

You say something to a theist like "Jesus did not exist"
Or "Allah did not exist"

They hear "YOU HATE ME, WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BE SO MEAN"

I have said to theists many times who claim life proves God "By that logic lightening proves Thor". No cussing but they still act like you murdered their family.

Word choice to me is way less important than substance. If someone bothers me that much, I respond, or ignore them. What should bother humans is isn't being offended, what should bother them is bad logic.