3 ms·

Always fascinating to me that being interested in fringe science and history always seems to mean listening to people who have no idea what they’re talking abou

Always fascinating to me that being interested in fringe science and history always seems to mean listening to people who have no idea what they’re talking about instead of finding the actual fringes and edges of legitimate research and understanding. Probably because the quacks are easier to understand and simply more fun, since they’re aiming to be entertaining rather than accurate. And accuracy is, frankly, boring. Anyway, going back to reading my book about how aliens told Bill Gates how to invent computers in 1992, leading him to found Apple and help the Allies win World War 2. It’s the story the mainstream media doesn’t want you to hear.

le-mark 5y ago
Yes that’s all fine and dandy, but Obama did make a statement about the UAPs recently, which was remarkable in its own right. Surely claims of quackery are true 99.9% of the time but it’s that .1% that’s the kicker.
- chasing 5y ago
  Obama said there are things in the sky we can't fully explain, to which: "no shit." He kind of jazzed it up because he was on The Late Show. So if you're claiming that Obama said aliens are visiting Earth and this validates the claims of Billy Bob Quackdoofus, well, he didn't do that. And it doesn't validate the quacks. And if it did, then why listen to the quacks at all if you have to point to someone like Obama, anyway, to prove their accuracy?
  - le-mark 5y ago
    I made no such claims of validating any quacks or quackery, as a careful reader would recognize. What is your agenda in misrepresenting what I wrote? To clarify the point; the fact that a former president commented on the UAPs at all was remarkable. To expand, even the existence and decades long cover up Area 51 and the proven things that have come from those programs (like the f-117) are examples of the .1% of “conspiracy” quackery that did happen to be true. I maintain these types of things are the gateway or hook that draw people deeper into conspiracies, but I’m no expert.
    - chasing 5y ago
      Both Clinton and Trump have discussed UFOs in recent memory, so not that remarkable. But, anyway, I guess I prefer listening to people with a greater than 0.1% accuracy rate.

le-mark 5y ago

Yes that’s all fine and dandy, but Obama did make a statement about the UAPs recently, which was remarkable in its own right. Surely claims of quackery are true 99.9% of the time but it’s that .1% that’s the kicker.

chasing 5y ago
Obama said there are things in the sky we can't fully explain, to which: "no shit." He kind of jazzed it up because he was on The Late Show. So if you're claiming that Obama said aliens are visiting Earth and this validates the claims of Billy Bob Quackdoofus, well, he didn't do that. And it doesn't validate the quacks. And if it did, then why listen to the quacks at all if you have to point to someone like Obama, anyway, to prove their accuracy?
- le-mark 5y ago
  I made no such claims of validating any quacks or quackery, as a careful reader would recognize. What is your agenda in misrepresenting what I wrote? To clarify the point; the fact that a former president commented on the UAPs at all was remarkable. To expand, even the existence and decades long cover up Area 51 and the proven things that have come from those programs (like the f-117) are examples of the .1% of “conspiracy” quackery that did happen to be true. I maintain these types of things are the gateway or hook that draw people deeper into conspiracies, but I’m no expert.
  - chasing 5y ago
    Both Clinton and Trump have discussed UFOs in recent memory, so not that remarkable. But, anyway, I guess I prefer listening to people with a greater than 0.1% accuracy rate.