Why don't you believe in aliens TEG?

Have you heard of Occams razor TEG. It is a rational way of finding the most probable cause of any event. What it says is you look at the simplest explanation first and if that fits the observed facts than that explanation is probably true. Scientists never use the word proof, we have theories not theorams.

Were I conspiracy theorist I dismiss the most simple explanations and go straight to one that fits my beliefs no matter how convoluted that explanation was. Were I religious I would dismiss the simple explanation and go straight to a super natural explanation which fits my belief. However I am neither, so look at the most simple explanation. Basically if I see an inanimate object move I look first for the string pulling it. Not very exciting I know but usually remarkable effective.

Take that back!

I have NEVER looked into Spart.

Yeah I'm well aware of his theory Spart but after researching I still cannot find a simple explanation why we are in debt to the Bank of England and pay interest on this debt or why the Americans are in the same position with the Federal Reserve. If you could be so kind to tell me what Ockham would have made of this I would greatly appreciate it and perhaps even come round to your way of thinking.

Thanks in advance

Don't fall for it Spart.

I don't think you could provide enough evidence to change TEG.

I remember watching a programme where a bunch on conspiracy theorists where taken to places relevant to their theories and presented with the normal FACTS. 50% changed their minds, saw the light but the other 50% resolutely disagreed saying the facts where wrong etc.

Religious folks always have ways out of an argument by saying 'this is the devil in disguise sent to test me' or 'god moves in mysterious ways' allowing them to carry on ignoring the facts. it's the same with conspiracy theorists.

Well if the evidence is so abundant Iwas can you please show me a little bit to explain the situation with the BoE?

Forget all this "conspiracy theory" business for a minute. isn't it a reasonable question that everyone (including yourself) should be asking Iwas?

Quick to demand evidence, slow to front up with any; the hallmark of any good conspiracy theorist

From the good old BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8530150.stm

Is this evidence enough for you

That's an article TEG. What are you claiming it is "proof" of exactly?

You still haven't said why you don't believe in alien reptiles.

I didn't, I said it was evidence that 666 wanted

It isn't "evidence" TEG, it's an article written by somebody, a bit like this comment, freely available to anyone who wants to read it.

I refuse to take you seriously while you remain evasive on the alien reptile issue.

OK Vidal, I know where this is heading but I will entertain you. I have seen no plausible argument to suggest that alien reptiles rule the world

I'm glad we're all getting along so well.

SBD, I was at the Millwall game last season and it was Millwall that played longball tactics which destroyed us. We tried to play it on the floor and got out muscled - by Henderson mainly! Billy Sharp was our best player that day.

Just out of interest Vidal, is there article by anyone or any publication that YOU would believe that during these rounds of quantitative easing the Bank of England is buying government bonds?

....doesn't your "evidence" show that the US debt is mainly owned by Japan, China and the UK?

What are your thoughts on 9/11 by the way, TEG?

The world as a whole is in debt 666, who to?

I think you know my thoughts on 911, if you didn't I think you would be able to guess

Can I ask you one simple question about 911. Do you believe a plane went into the Pentagon?

comment by TEG. (U15242) posted 1 hour, 14 minutes ago
OK Vidal, I know where this is heading but I will entertain you. I have seen no plausible argument to suggest that alien reptiles rule the world

---------------------------------------------------------------

Thank god you've cleared that one up TEG.

That was one of the points on the programme TEG along with the other one that crashed into a field. They took the theorists to the field and got them to talk to the victims families. Totally embarrassed they where for holding their views and that was why 50% caved in. The other 50% where just weird cranks who where sad at hearing the victims families but then just dismissed it as aset up when they got back in the bus.

666 did you really mean to discuss 9/11 even though the last comment on Wassa's article was 11:09.

It's just too scary to believe isn't it.



or is it?

No, the reason I ask is because he uses the BBC as 'proof' of his one theory but then disregards their 'complicity in the 9/11 cover-up' which they were a party to.

I didn't use BBC as "proof", it was an example of one I thought you would believe as in recent years you've based you opinions on Clough and Derby through BBC Radio Derby, BBC EMT and BBC Football League Show

Do you believe a plane went into the Pentagon 666?

TEG Do you believe the 3 rd plane crashed into a field?

As for the Pentagon, I can't say I've studied it. It was on the news and seemed correct and I have no reason to disbelieve it.

As for researching stuff, my spare time is taken up with sport of various kinds, 606 and dossing around so I have no desire to spend hours and hours chasing the truth by scouring a thousand documents, putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5.

Denying that alien reptiles rule the world is exactly the sort of thing that one of their minions would say to protect their identity. Don't think they will reward you, TEG - when you have fulfilled your function it's off to the lair and being fed screaming to the hatchlings for you.

When anyone questions one of your, what's the expression?: "out of mainstream thinking" theories, your final refuge is to ask someone to prove that it isn't true. A gang of shape-shifting lizards occupying the seats of power around the globe is every bit as probable as many of your other quarter-baked hypotheses. Where it suits, you demand evidence FOR; where it suits, you cite lack of evidence AGAINST. You are happy to seize on anything somebody taps on a loony website that fits your barmy worldview yet at the same time will reject vast amounts of documentation of events that don't fit as being made up.

I know you don't appreciate being called a nutter TEG, but it's hard to think of any other word that fits the bill under the circumstances. Maybe some of your paranoia and suspicion would be better applied to the state of affairs at Forest - the banning of journalists, removal of the press room to create an "entertainment room" for exclusive use by Billy Davies' friends and family, the Football League investigation into the shady, somewhat less than fit and proper Jim Price, etc. Nope, you're more than happy to swallow the "everything's just fine" line when it emanates from the tweets of King Fawaz. It's just everything else in the world that is propaganda and lies.