See other 9/11 Articles
Title: The rational thinker versus the paranoid
Source:
Dr. Kenneth A. Rahn, Sr
URL Source: http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/conspira ... l_thinker_versus_paranoid.html
Published: Aug 17, 2007
Author: Dr. Kenneth A. Rahn, Sr
Post Date: 2007-08-17 11:09:58 by Mister Clean
Keywords: paranoid, truther, neocons
Views: 722
Comments: 92
The rational thinker versus the paranoid Presented with the same evidence for a mystery, the rational thinker and the paranoid respond very differently. 1. Checks the evidence carefully and doesn’t rely on uncertain evidence 1. Grabs onto a few pieces of evidence and defends them inflexibly. 2. Doesn’t care which evidence he must let go. 2. Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and won’t let go. 3. Seeks a realistic answer in simple and familiar processes. 3. Invokes complex, unrealistic scenarios controlled by powerful forces behind the scenes. 4. Accepts only what he can critically assess (falsifiable ideas). 4. Deals in explanations that can never be critically assessed (unfalsifiable theories). 5. Is willing to live with unresolved explanations for long periods. 5. Demands quick, even immediate explanations. 6. Accepts the roles of chance and human foibles. 6. Invents scenarios when nothing ever goes wrong. 7. Uses same rational approach in the rest of his life. 7. Approaches many other “events” in the same irrational, paranoid way. (i.e., both people are consistent across their lives.) 8. Finds empowering explanations. 8. Feels powerless before these huge forces (victims). 9. Accepts all demonstrated evidence. 9. Will not face evidence that destroys his theory. 10. Is willing to live with some fraction of unexplained or contradictory evidence. 10. Insists on fitting everything into his explanation, often by explaining difficult items as further evidence of conspiracy. 11. Tries to keep everything in proportion. 11. Often seizes single pieces of evidence and blows them out of proportion. 12. Will change ideas a new evidence emerges. 12. Sticks to preconceived notion regardless of new evidence. 13. Open, flexible, empowered, strong. 13. Preconceived, rigid, victimlike, cowardly. The rational thinker
The paranoid
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
It is quite remarkable how both "truthers" and neocons are so alike in their paranoia.
The rational thinker also gets all of his facts from Fox News, the New York Post, the Washington Times, the WSJ Editorial Page, AM Radio and other GOP controlled information outlets. And anything thing else is a "conspiracy". Don't you agree?
.
These are essentially premises outlined in Mein Kampf. Why is Dr. Rahn being given credit? Is he a self-hater? Paging Bill Buckley. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Don't you agree? I would say that the rational thinker gets his facts from a wide variety of news and information sources. It is the neocon paranoid who gets his facts exclusively from the sources you cite. And the "truther" paranoid gets his facts from similar group of narrowly defined sources. See, the amazing thing about the table above is how it demonstrates that neocons and "truther" types make up the two sides of the paranoid coin.
Now you're here to tell us you've read Mein Kampf? Before I flick the Bozo switch?
I didn't say a word about neo-cons, and the sources I cited above don't target neo-cons. They target Republicans. Given this, and given what you said above, I would say that Truthers and Republicans are two sides of the same paranoid coin. Your efforts to distance your party from the party head, George W. Bush, for the purpose of the upcoming election are very transparent. Were it not for their enablers the Republicans, the neo-cons would not exist - but you know this.
.
Flick the bozo switch for all I care I'm not interested in talking about Mein Kampf.
*click*
Ah, I see you're another Freeper-like poster who thinks I'm a Bush supporter because I criticize "truthers." Just as Freepers attack Bush critics as liberal al-Qaeda supporters, you attack me as a Bush supporter because I mock 9/11 "truth" paranoia. You fit nicely upon that paranoid coin.
Sink, by my realistic calculation, totally unbiased, you fall into every category on the right hand side. Hey, you posted it and it is self descriptive of you.
I don't believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories OR al-Qaeda conspiracy theories.
A couple of observations here. You are obviously obsessed with the 911 truth movement. I say this because I see you spending hours on line every day shilling the Republican talking points on this subject. No other proof is necessary. If you doubt me, just call up your posts here. Given that this dedicated shilling for the GOP side of the arguments exists, and it does, my question is why? Why should you care if people question what the government tells them? This seems very healtyth to me and I actively encourage it. If the government tells me something, I try to verify it before swallowing it - because I have caught them lying to me in the past. From my perspective, it seems the more eyes on this matter the better. I am very happy to see people questioning every single ascpect of the event. There are some fishey parts of the story. Are you pushing the theory that the goverment must be trusted in all cases and that fact checking is evil? Or are you worried that this fact checking might injure the Repulbican Party in the upcoming elections - the party you obviously shill for. Your crap about this just being entertainment is obviously false. You invest too much time and effort in it for that. You lack the sense of irony and humor that others exhibit when they are just having fun. You are obviously dead serious about your shilling. Give the above, it's pretty clear that you oppose the 911 truth movement because it harms the Republican Party.
.
When you corner a wingnut (or a Freeper) with facts, they go personal - as you just did here. Thank you for admitting that I was correct in my post above. Let me add that you are a bald faced liar as well. Re-read my post and point to where I called you a Bush supporter. You can't - but you know that. In fact, I noted that you are now trying to distance your party from Bush with your shilling. Your dishonesty is so predictable.
.
So one is either with the "truthers" or against them, eh? I'm sure you are completely unaware how much you sound like they typical Bush/GOP/neocon moron.
You are a deliberate, knowing liar. Please point out where I said that, or even implied that. You can't - but you know that. Your dishonesty is so predictable.
.
I'm not a Republican. Simple as that.
Let me give you some advice: You come from a group that admires scummy dishonesty if it fools the goobers into voting the way you want. But that doesn't sell with the rest of the country. This is why you guys are becoming known as the twenty-eight percenters.
.
You are a certified wingnut, you were at Freakville and you are here.
Neither is Hannity, O'Reilly or Badeye. No shill can announce themselves as a member of the party and be credible. But you know that. Besides, you've already been caught out in a couple of lies on just this thread alone. Never mind the others. So why should I believe a word you say?
.
It's obvious that you perceive criticism of the "truth" movement as "shilling" for the GOP.
I have no idea what you're babbling about.
Yes you do. You just don't have an answer for it. I think you are trying to avoid a discussion on the dishonesty of the GOP noise machine and the general FR style of propaganda. It doesn't bode well for you.
.
I told you, I'm not a Republican. Your problem is that you can't deal with independent criticism of idiotic conspiracy theories. In your small mind, anyone who doubts 9/11 "truth" is a Republican.
Are too. You know what happens to little boys that tell fibs?
And I told you that no shill worth his salt admits to party affilitation - see the thread above. You ignored this point and tried to run over it as if it were very inconvenient to you. You do agree that no shill would ever admit to being a member of the party he shills for don't you? Doesn't O'Reilly claim to be an Indpenedent even though his Republican voter registration circulates on the internet? Your problem is that you can't deal with independent criticism of idiotic conspiracy theories. You know you can't post a quote to support this and I would go so far as to say this is the third knowing, bald faced lie that you have pushed on this thread alone. Read my post above. I said I approve of people fact checking the government. I didn't favor any result in the fact checking. But you know this. You just don't want other people reading the thread to know this. In your small mind, anyone who doubts 9/11 "truth" is a Republican. So again I win the argument. The cornered wingnut once more begins hurling feces when argument fails him. Let me add that this too is a knowing, bald faced lie. You can't post a link to back up your freeper style smear here. But you know that. As you know, and as you don't want others who read this thread to know, I commented on the motives that you - you and not the world at large - exhibit in your obesssive quest against the 911 people questioning the goverment. But you know this. You just don't want others to know this.
.
I don't need to repost your quotes accusing me of being a Republican shill because I challenge some stupid conspiracy theory, they're all over this thread. That fact that you knee-jerk label me a Republican shill because I dare to ridicule 9/11 "truth" is all the evidence necessary to conclude you have a very narrow mind. You equate criticism of 9/11 "truth" with being a Republican and that's just plain stupid.
I don't need to repost your quotes accusing me of being a Republican shill because I challenge some stupid conspiracy theory, they're all over this thread. That fact that you knee-jerk label me a Republican shill because I dare to ridicule 9/11 "truth" is all the evidence necessary to conclude you have a very narrow mind. You equate criticism of 9/11 "truth" with being a Republican and that's just plain stupid. You characterize point #2 from the table above... 2. Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and won’t let go.
My opinion is that you are a Republican shill. My reason for thinking this is your very serious and determined attack on the 911 truthers. And your dishonesty about this just being a game for you - and I've supported this further up on the thread. I am also of the opinion that you are a Freeper. I have two reasons for thinking this: First, you are very dishonest in your arguments. You will lie at the drop of a hat as long as the lie furthers your cause. Freepers and hard core Republicans are the only people I have ever seen embrace this sort of pathological dishonesty. You have been caught out in lies several times on this thread alone. Secondly, when pressed with an inconvenient fact, you immediately go personal and begin smearing like a Fox News shill - or a freeper. (Note that I've highlighted your Freeper style smear tactics at several points on the thread above - so please don't start your "quote me" game .... again.) The only other thing lacking in your Republican credentials is a gay lover. So if it looks like a duck, walks like a ducka nd quacks like a duck, I am disinclined to believe your wild conspiracy theories about the duck being some sort of independent thinker.
.
My reason for thinking this is your very serious and determined attack on the 911 truthers. Yes, I know. Your narrow mind equates criticism of 911 "truth" with being a Republican.
You know of course you're going to get your ass kicked by the believers in the black magic of remote-controlled airplanes, explosives hidden in towers, and brilliant but evil polymaths that no one can seem to find.
“When I am the weaker, I ask you for my freedom, because that is your principle; but when I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, because that is my principle.”-Louis Veuillot
I offered some good support for my position. You respond by hurling monkey shit like a Freeper or other species of Republican shill. Thank you for proving my point. By the way, as I noted above, your mischaracterization of my position here is a bald faced lie. A knowing, deliberate bald faced lie on your part.
.
I know they'll try but they will just be demonstrating the paranoid characteristics detailed in the table above.
You've only offered your opinion. An opinion that drips from a very narrow mind.
Another mischaracterization that amounts to a knowing, deliberate, bald faced lie. I have supported every statement I made above. But you know that. You just don't want others to know that.
.
If that was the only thing he didn't believe in, he'd be fine. It's his support for globalism, amnesty, war on terror, REALID, Patriot Act, communism, and sniping that make him a buffoon. We can disagree on 9-11. He is the anti- thesis of Freedom4UM in every way, not just one. We're not talking about disagreeing on a couple things here. It's akin to someone not even speaking the same language.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition You say I'm a Republican shill. That's your narrow minded opinion. Are you so deluded that you consider your opinion to be fact? No wonder you believe in conspiracy theories.
Not deluded. I believe it for the reasons I've cited above. But these reasons are exactly what you are trying to obfuscate here with your Freeper style attack. Instead of throwing shit - like a Freeper or other sort of GOP shill - why don't you attack the reasons I've cited for my opinion?
.
But these reasons are exactly what you are trying to obfuscate here with your Freeper style attack. Instead of throwing shit - like a Freeper or other sort of GOP shill - why don't you attack the reasons I've cited for my opinion? What's this? Logic??? LOL. [Can you imagine Kleenex boy trying to play chess or score on a debate team?!]
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition He does't do that. He won't answer your questions or address any of your points. He bitches about this place being like FR but it only seems to be that way when he is around.
Comments (41 - 92) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Mister Clean (#1)
#3. To: Mister Clean (#1)
(Edited)
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#4. To: Mister Clean, William Buckley (#1)
It is quite remarkable how both "truthers" and neocons are so alike in their paranoia.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#5. To: ... (#2)
The rational thinker also gets all of his facts from Fox News, the New York Post, the Washington Times, the WSJ Editorial Page, AM Radio and other GOP controlled information outlets. And anything thing else is a "conspiracy".
#6. To: Mister Clean (#5)
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#7. To: Mister Clean (#5)
(Edited)
#8. To: Eoghan (#6)
Before I flick the Bozo switch?
#9. To: Mister Clean (#8)
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#10. To: ... (#7)
Your efforts to distance your party from the party head, George W. Bush, for the purpose of the upcoming election are very transparent.
#11. To: Mister Clean (#0)
paranoid, truther, neocons
#12. To: Cynicom (#11)
Sink, by my realistic calculation, totally unbiased, you fall into every category on the right hand side.
#13. To: Mister Clean (#0)
#14. To: Mister Clean (#10)
(Edited)
h, I see you're another Freeper-like poster who thinks I'm a Bush supporter because I criticize "truthers."
#15. To: ... (#13)
You are obviously obsessed with the 911 truth movement. I say this because I see you spending hours on line every day shilling the Republican talking points on this subject.
#16. To: Mister Clean (#15)
So one is either with the "truthers" or against them, eh?
#17. To: ... (#14)
Re-read my post and point to where I called you a Bush supporter. You can't - but you know that. In fact, I noted that you are now trying to distance your party from Bush with your shilling.
#18. To: Mister Clean (#15)
(Edited)
#19. To: Mister Clean (#17)
I'm not a Republican.
#20. To: Mister Clean (#17)
(Edited)
I'm not a Republican.
#21. To: ... (#16)
Please point out where I said that, or even implied that. You can't - but you know that.
#22. To: ... (#18)
You come from a group that admires scummy dishonesty if it fools the goobers into voting the way you want. But that doesn't sell with the rest of the country. This is why you guys are becoming known as the twenty-eight percenters.
#23. To: Mister Clean (#22)
(Edited)
I have no idea what you're babbling about.
#24. To: ... (#23)
I think you are trying to avoid a discussion on the dishonesty of the GOP noise machine and the general FR style of propaganda.
#25. To: Mister Clean (#24)
I told you, I'm not a Republican.
#26. To: Mister Clean (#24)
I told you, I'm not a Republican.
#27. To: ... (#26)
You know you can't post a quote to support this
#28. To: ... (#26)
You know you can't post a quote to support this
#29. To: Mister Clean (#28)
(Edited)
#30. To: ... (#29)
My opinion is that you are a Republican shill.
#31. To: Mister Clean (#0)
#32. To: Mister Clean (#30)
(Edited)
Your narrow mind equates criticism of 911 "truth" with being a Republican.
#33. To: YertleTurtle (#31)
You know of course you're going to get your ass kicked by the believers in the black magic of remote-controlled airplanes, explosives hidden in towers, and brilliant but evil polymaths that no one can seem to find.
#34. To: ... (#32)
I offere some good support for my position.
#35. To: Mister Clean (#34)
You've only offered your opinion.
#36. To: YertleTurtle, cynicom (#31)
(Edited)
You know of course you're going to get your ass kicked by the believers in the black magic
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#37. To: ... (#35)
Another mischaracterization that amounts to a knowing, deliberate, bald faced lie.
#38. To: Mister Clean (#37)
Are you so deluded that you consider your opinion to be fact?
#39. To: ... (#38)
(Edited)
I believe it for the reasons I've cited above.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#40. To: ... (#38)
why don't you attack the reasons I've cited for my opinion?
.
.
.