ABC says conspiracy web sites are contributing to mental health issues

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Evidence of your bias on the subject matter:

You believe MSM is to blame for linking conspiracy web sites to mental health issues.

Yet ATS is not to blame for the posts in which people contribute to the website.

Yes. I have evidence in my case. One article by MSM that is nothing but opinion and conjecture.

What examples did they give us again?

Somehow you fail to blame the reporter on ABC's behalf and jump directly to the conclusion it is the MSM, an even broader conclusion than if you were to blame ABC.

In the same context, you would therefor blame AboveTopSecret, or it's parent company (if there even is one), for the posts which are on their website.

Just thought I'd point that out because it has had a significant impact on what you have contributed thus far.

Nooooo. You are -again- twisting things to fit what you want to believe. I can blame the MSM for lying because I have an example of them lying. I can also condemn them for the lie since they have no examples of conspiracy websites contributing to any mental illness. How many times did you burn yourself before you learned to stop doing it?

Keep dodging my questions, Yoda. I will just ask them again.

Additionally I will re-state something which was in the original article and is thus far completely overlooked by you.

Whether or not conspiracy theories harm people who are susceptible to mental illness is a matter of debate among psychiatrists.

Exactly. Which is why it is a matter of debate among us here on ATS. We should all stop bickering with "I'm right, you are wrong" ideology on the subject when neither opinions can be conclusively proven to be true.

Opinions can never be proven true.

Then why did you spend so many pages telling me it was "factual?" You said I could quote you on that!

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Evidence of your bias on the subject matter:

You believe MSM is to blame for linking conspiracy web sites to mental health issues.

Yet ATS is not to blame for the posts in which people contribute to the website.

Yes.

Just thought I would point that out. Being bias pretty much rules you out of the equation since you are no longer able to see both sides of the spectrum.

reply to post by Yoda411


I will just pick one random question you never answered out of soooooo many.

You claimed that learning disabilities and mental illness were the same thing. Then I said....

I thought we were talking about mental illness. You know, how you claimed this site made someone kill themselves. Then you went on to say that it is that dangerous because of the conspiracies posted here.

Really? Did he kill himself because of the supposed 2 by 4 on mars, or the shadow people, or was it the glass pyramids on the moon, JFK?. OK, so that is a dead end so you shift and twist. Gotcha.

Let's see if you can answer that instead of twisting some more.

Originally posted by Yoda411
Evidence of your bias on the subject matter:

You believe MSM is to blame for linking conspiracy web sites to mental health issues.

Yet ATS is not to blame for the posts in which people contribute to the website.

Yes.

Just thought I would point that out. Being bias pretty much rules you out of the equation since you are no longer able to see both sides of the spectrum.



LOL. YES I am biased. I am biased toward the side that had an example to make its case with.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


I have so brutally drilled home that it is my opinion, and does not have to be yours.

Additionally your argument continues to reflect the debating style of Kent Hovid, where you twist my argument to suit your needs.

I never said ATS made him kill himself - as you have so incorrectly twisted out of proportion. I said ATS could have contributed in my own opinion, and I currently have no evidence to rule it completely out of the equation.

Originally posted by Yoda411
I currently have no evidence to rule it completely out of the equation.

Do you have any evidence to put it into the equation?

EVIDENCE - not opinions

[edit on 20-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


The obscurity within the study of psychology.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


What a pathetic attempt at a debate. I like how you went back to change your response to make it appear to be more valid. I'm done responding to your complete ignorance. It has proven to be a waste of time.

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

What a pathetic attempt at a debate. I like how you went back to change your response to make it appear to be more valid. I'm done responding to your complete ignorance. It has proven to be a waste of time.

I did not change it to make it appear more valid. How do you get that? I clarified for you what evidence meant because you have had so much trouble with words so far. You have no argument. You have no case. You have an idea that you want to sell very badly. No evidence that it did not? You have none that it did either though do you? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Yep it is your opinion. Your opinion is based on ignorance and false news report. Nice!

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

I like how you went back to change your response to make it appear to be more valid.

By adding this you mean "EVIDENCE - not opinions "

I sure did go back and do some crazy editing to make my argument stronger didn't I? I really wish I knew why I ever thought you would get it. I am still using words. That has gotta throw ya.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


Let's pretend for two seconds that your argument is potentially valid.

You asked, why should we consider this being true?

I answered, the obscurity within the study of psychology.

So I will ask you the same question.

Why should we completely rule out conspiracy websites from the equation?

reply to post by Yoda411


Waiting.. Waiting... Waiting...

Oh look! He's offline! Now that's convenient.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


Looks like you stuck your foot in your mouth on this one.

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Let's pretend for two seconds that your argument is potentially valid.

You asked, why should we consider this being true?

I answered, the obscurity within the study of psychology.

So I will ask you the same question.

Why should we completely rule out conspiracy websites from the equation?

Because there was never a reason to include them!

Originally posted by Yoda411
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

 

Looks like you stuck your foot in your mouth on this one.

Cannot see how. Every time that I want to strangle the keyboard, I go away from that thread for a while. That is why I barely check back here now.

My foot is still firmly on the ground. I am glad that you can manipulate the reality of this discussion in such a way as to actually claim what you do. How nice it must be to have that kind of delusional mind. What do you not understand about the difference between something we DO have evidence of and your idea based on an article that was really just someone else's IDEA.

Evidence to show ABC is making crap up. My point.

No evidence to even imagine conspiracy sites do anything to contribute to any mental illnesses.. Your point.

See the difference yet? I am saying something based on evidence that we can all see.

You are saying something based on an article that was based on nothing.

DIFFERENT.

I really wish you would get a dictionary.

ENOUGH. Keep the personal tripe for a site that accepts such. ATS doesn't.

[edit on 21-12-2008 by alien]

One of the posts removed for being off topic was rather pertinent to the thread title. If we start just accepting, believing, discussing, spreading, stories based on nothing because the news reported it without even trying to back it up, then we are going down a very dangerous road. This needs to be called for what it is. Editorial, not news.

Haa. Yeah ok. I have had bi-polar manic depression for 10 years and that's before I ever saw this site. I love how they just make these silly theories without any real proof. Why blame everything on something else. To me it;s like when they say hard core music makes people hurt others. Haaa not so much.