Is it so terrible to deny things?

I struggle with this idea that for certain topics, someone is a "denier". It's as if those topics have some special status that you can't deny! Why? We here global warming denier, 9/11 story denier, and the other denier that I'm not going I mention as it would overshadow my point.

We know (or ought to know) that human beings are subject to lemming type behaviours so isn't it a good thing that some people questions basic assumptions that we hold to be true. Isn't the fact that we threaten them instead it applaud them bad, and doesn't it reveal something? Could it be that they are right and it's not empirical fact but lemming type behaviour holding together factually incorrect views?

(edited 7 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

L'Evil Wolf

jet fuel cannot melt steel beams /thread

Reply 2

DrLovejoy

Original post by L'Evil Wolf

jet fuel cannot melt steel beams /thread

I know you're totally correct that the official 9/11 story does not compute with physics. But this thread isn't about 9/11. It's about this concept of unquestionable orthodoxy, the unquestionable orthodoxy usually being what the TV and newspapers say.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 3

Aj12

Original post by DrLovejoy

No one ever claimed jet fuel melted the steel beams.

On thread, you can deny things all you like. The issue is conspiracy theories are for the most part wrong. They rely on distortions of fact or logical fallacies to make the point. There is no unquestionable orthodoxy, you simply don't have a right to be listened to when you claim vaccines cause autism when every piece of scientific evidence states the contrary. Those who believe bizarre theories cannot accept they are wrong, instead of considering the evidence used against them they would rather appeal to a persecution complex.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 4

taw123

Original post by DrLovejoy

Whenever you hear the word 'denier' in a political context it normally means that the people who wish to silence the denier are lying.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 5

ODES_PDES

Original post by L'Evil Wolf

jet fuel cannot melt steel beams /thread

Not again

Reply 6

Drewski

Deniers are odd folk.

There's an understandable urge to want to figure out life, to understand what's going on around you. I completely get that. People who want to make sense of life. It's basically the same mindset that began religion.

As above, the issue comes when their belief in these things makes them completely ignore evidence and arguments.

Personally, my biggest dislike about them is the arrogance. They presume they're the only ones that could have possibly worked this out. That's just ridiculous.

Reply 7

Jebedee

I agree completely. We reserve the right to be wrong. But the biggest problem is that when you give special status to denial, like holocaust denial. It becomes hard to justify why similar status cannot be given to other things. Like letting religious nutjobs lobby for blasphemy laws.

Reply 8

No Way Jose

If you deny the Holocaust, a crime in some nations, and practically hate speech in Britain., most will think of you as a horrible person. How can you deny the genocide of a people, it's a fact and we've all the horrific images that somehow backs up 6 million people dying rather than thousands...

There has never been room to question what we are told and taught in schools. It has always been this way and anyone who questions is persecuted.

We simply have to accept 6 million because anything else is unacceptable. Sorry, but take a look at that war and how many other people perished. What of the millions starved in Holodomor a man made famine by the Soviets? What of the millions who died in Soviet work camps? these were surely Holocausts, but not of Jews... Why does their suffering matter less?

The above mentioned also do not have a set in stone number of people who were killed. They can vary from a few millions to ten million. With the Holocaust, to say anything other than around 6 million is considered blasphemy.

There was a time they claimed 4 million died in Auschwitz alone, yet later it was reduced to under a million and somehow the 6 million still remains.

We are very gullible.

A reminder to those who yell fascist, that is exactly what these communist murderers did.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 9

QE2

Original post by DrLovejoy

We know (or ought to know) that human beings are subject to lemming type behaviours so isn't it a good thing that some people questions basic assumptions that we hold to be true. Isn't the fact that we threaten them instead it applaud them bad, and doesn't it reveal something? Could it be that they are right and it's not empirical fact but lemming type behaviour holding together factually incorrect views?

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - DP Moynihan

Reply 10

MagicNMedicine

Good science is all about testing and challenging dominant theories.

However the issue with a lot of "deniers" on the internet is they aren't carrying out research or testing theories etc, they start by deciding what position they want to hold, eg they don't like environmental laws so they want to believe climate change is a myth, and then they selectively search for pieces of evidence (reliable or unreliable) to support their theory, they accept things that support their theory unquestioningly but then disregard evidence that goes against their theory.

If they find that most evidence is against their theory, they take the smug attitude that they are the well informed ones, and the majority of scientists are all just sheep following the mainstream opinion.

Reply 11

Unkempt_One

Repeating basically everyone, there's a difference between 'questioning' things and thorough inquiry.

911 inside job

Original post by Aj12

conspiracy theorists are often people with low IQs who are unable to assess evidence efficiently.

Reply 14

anosmianAcrimony

In our society there's a narrative, a recurring myth, if you will, of the heretic genius. It describes a great man who discovers something that goes completely against the prevailing paradigm of his time, and is persecuted for it and not listened to. But eventually, the world recognises the truth of what he has to say and it is accepted as the new paradigm. Common examples include Galileo, Einstein, and Darwin.

The problem is, the narrative of the heretic genius truly is a myth - that's not really how science works! All three of those men built on bodies of thought and data collected by others. Galileo and Darwin were simply the most vocal or most obvious proponents of schools of thought that were already in the process of becoming the prevailing paradigm. Within scientific circles, most people already believed what they had to say.

Nonetheless the narrative has persevered and been glorified. Nowadays, everyone wants to be that persecuted heretic genius who discovered the next great truth before anyone else has thought of it, and whenever such a denier is told, "that's garbage", it only entrenches them in their role by giving them the persecution they were expecting.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 15

anarchism101

Original post by No Way Jose

You do know the ~6,000,000 is arrived at by demographic studies, records, etc, not simply looking at pictures and guessing?

There has never been room to question what we are told and taught in schools. It has always been this way and anyone who questions is persecuted.

Tell me, do you think we should "question" whether Henry VIII really had six wives? Or if Julius Caesar really existed? Do you think we should perpetually continue to "question" every single thing regardless of evidence for it? Or is it just this.

We simply have to accept 6 million because anything else is unacceptable.

You know Raul Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews, still considered the classic work on the Holocaust, put the number closer to 5 million? But I suspect you'll now move the goalposts anyway.

Sorry, but take a look at that war and how many other people perished. What of the millions starved in Holodomor a man made famine by the Soviets? What of the millions who died in Soviet work camps? these were surely Holocausts, but not of Jews... Why does their suffering matter less?

Why do you think accepting the death toll of the Holocaust to be approximately six million inherently devalues other suffering?

There was a time they claimed 4 million died in Auschwitz alone

Sigh

No, they didn't. Some Red Army soldier stuck up a plaque saying 4 million for whatever reason (not the plaque did not say 4 million Jews, simply 4 million victims), but that was never taken seriously by Holocaust historians.

Reply 16

ChaoticButterfly

Original post by anarchism101

I don't really get the issue they have with this... because if "only" 4 million people died that makes it totally ok. It's only past 6 million when it becomes unethical :s-smilie: