Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Manifestor_of_Light

(21,046 posts)
7. When the scientific evidence doesn't agree with the official explanation
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 11:58 PM
Oct 2014

the person presenting the scientific evidence will be shunned or discredited or fired from their job.
I know a 9/11 investigator who says the destruction is long term low temp fires.

There's an official narrative to suspicious events that must be maintained at all costs, even when people talk about what happened on the inside of the event. I'm old enough to remember the Kennedy assassination. The American people don't believe the Warren Commission Report and never have. And Snarlin' Arlen came up with the magic bullet theory. Numerous groups of people wanted JFK killed. I'm not sure who's responsible but lone gunman doesn't fit with the evidence.

And the official story spreaders don't want any discussion of any other theories. Even discussion of not-the-official-story is threatening to them.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»New studies: ‘Conspiracy ...»Reply #7