Thread: Illuminati

Originally Posted by mtguy8787

When trying to search for something that is largely shrouded, never give serious weight to one person's work, no matter how convincing it sounds.

Most such materials mash what can plausibly be taken as factual (which of course, depends on ones world view), and what is interpreted/extrapolated from it.

Secret societies are a perfect example. Depending on which writers perspective you take, the same society might range from an honorable, enlightenment seeking group, to an evil, satanic, power seeking conspiracy group.

***

A perfect example is a popular idea in "freemasonry conspiracies". One CT nut I knew was going on and showing how the geometries/designs/numbers involved in the design of washinton DC were "eerily similar" to each other, and other things around the world.

The conclusion: Its all part of a big conspiracy, right?

If you frame these facts right, such as the material that this particular nut was showing me, it can seem as though "something is up".

However, when one has the knowledge of the existance of near-universal traditions of sacred geometry and sacred mathematics throughout history, finds that these "conspiratorial" designs/mathematics correspond to many of these, and combines this with the fact that mysticism was often a part of freemasonry tradition, this "ominous" relationship becomes obvious... and benign

------------------------Post auto merged------------------------

9/11 is another example. While the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle, as usual, fundamentalist nuts draw irrational conclusions from facts.

The controversial "fact" that the collapse of the building and the way they collapsed could only be a controlled demolition, and the supposed existence of explosive/thermite remnants found, is "proof" of a massive, inter-government conspiracy.

The part that 99% of the effort the nuts spend arguing, is that "yes, the facts show there were explosives". In their mind, this is the main thing that matters, because if there were indeed explosives.... this somehow proves that it wasn't a terrorist attack, and that it confirms their conception of a massive, unrealistic conspiracy.

So you have the basic format of "the evidence shows there were explosives involved, therefore, the only reasonable explanation is our version of this massive conspiracy"

In other words -- and this is a common rhetorical device which is used, probably both consciously by some people, and unconsciously by most, is that most of the effort and argument centers around the less significant.

In other words, with 9/11, EVEN IF THERE WERE 100% proof of explosives used, this is hardly conclusive evidence of their beliefs. In fact, its not even plausible evidence. However, this all gets drowned out, and most 9/11 arguments, for the most part.... on both sides... miss this little observation.


So its important to learn to consciously distinguish the presented facts, from the presented conclusions, as in human discourse, they are usually intertwined, and if you don't, the result is usually swallowing both, together.

I agree with you completely about collecting data from many sources and to not credit truth to any.
I also follow the money, I also think it's fishy Building 7 was dropped with almost no mention at all, Here is A web site to explain about building 7
Remember Building 7 | Stand with the 9-11 families demanding a NEW Building 7 investigation - What is Building 7 ?
I don't want to believe that our country is A slave to the fe.d.eral re.serv..e And the C..ia is the work house of the Groups trying to control the world, But it's extremely obvious if you study the "Facts" around every major event in U.S. history, And what happens as result. Also the family tree's of our leaders and the horror stories from people they have hurt. I have and will continue too, I don't Claim to know anything. I feel as I feel and I am the only one I know even trying to know anything other than how to get money. Building 7 is interesting to say the least.
I would love too read your thoughts about this so anyone please chime in if you have anything to say.
7 Facts about Building 7

1) If fire caused Building 7 to collapse, it would be the first ever fire-induced collapse of a steel-frame high-rise.
2) Building 7’s collapse was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.
3) According to a Zogby poll in 2006, 43% of Americans did not know about Building 7.
4) It took the federal government seven years to conduct an investigation and issue a report for Building 7.
5) 1,700+ architects and engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation into the destruction of Building 7, specifying that it should include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives.
6) Numerous witnesses say the possibility of demolishing Building 7 was widely discussed by emergency personnel at the scene and advocated by the building’s owner.

7) Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker”.