GoKunming Forums

GoKunming feedback...

alienew (422 posts) • -8
Comment hidden by user downvote Click to expand

Dolphin says he will no longer post. Dolphin's gokunming posting behaviour was better than that of most of those who responded to him. He complained of personal attacks in his last(?) post. My sympathies are entirely with him, although I wish he were not so sensitive. This has nothing to do with my own very frequent and very fundamental disagreements with him.
Gee, congratulations folks. My thumbs-down to all involved - ridicule rather than reason, information, or anything else useful. Personalities and egos rather than pretended topics.
And I'm not pretending to be completely innocent of anything.

lemon lover (1006 posts) • +5

@Alienew
(This all reflects to the contributions of Dolphin to www.gokunming.com/[...] and my reactions to his contributions).
Somebody who quotes from bennettleeross.com a website that has as subtitle “reprogramming the indoctrinated mind” and does not realize that the entire contains of this website is bullshit and fake news, conspiracy theories and an attempt to indoctrinate you, has to be stopped.
From David P. Wozney own article on www.ocii.com/~dpwozney/dinosaurs.htm I quote:
“Note the use of the words "possible", "possibly", "possibility", "may", and "could". There is an important difference, between claiming something is true, and claiming something is possible.”
Which he utters on top of his own conspiracy theory about the none existence of dinosaurs.
And then he uses the exactly same trick used by Gavin Menzies; in chapter one he offers a possibility and in chapter two this possibility has become a fact, the possibility brought in chapter two becomes a fact in chapter three and so on.
David P. Wozney is probably having a good laugh that so many people and other websites actually reflect to his nonsense just like Gavin Menzies he probably thought that he had found something to cash in on.

The problem I have with Dolphin’s contribution is the same as I had with Geezer playing the “merchant of doubt” role in earlier threads about global warming (Sorry Climate Change) and Peter99 in the “White Rabbit” thread where he defended Alan Jones. The point is that they used this platform to spread conspiracy theories and conspiracy theories are plain dangerous. They got Trump elected and are at least contributing factors in Brexit and the rise of the extreme right. Historically conspiracy theories enabled Hitler’s rise to power and to WW-II.
The problem is that people are now doubting everything and instead of relying on sound science rather believe things like vaccination leads to autism and homeopathic treatment is much better, the government is a swamp, we have to have guns to defend ourselves and the illuminati and Masonics are after us.

And before you start; free speech has nothing to do with it. Free speech is something else than misleading people for your own gain and interest or your religious beliefs.

GoKunming is the website for the international community in Kunming and Yunnan related to things concerning Kunming and Yunnan and should not become the Breitbart branch in Kunming/Yunnan (With Breitbart I mean all conspiracy websites).

Dazzer (2813 posts) • +6

considering most on here are graduates,and should be capable of rational thought, i am amazed by how dumb, easily lead, and prone to throwing any scientific apporach to evaluating info out the window some people are, or wish to appear to be

Liumingke1234 (3297 posts) • -6
Comment hidden by user downvote Click to expand

Many conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Just look it up. Remember that the powers

that be put labels to enslave your mind from free thinking. They label you racist, facist, homophobe, nuts, etc. In the end all truths come out even if it's after you're gone and sadly not able to witness it.

herenow (357 posts) • -7
Comment hidden by user downvote Click to expand

@lemon lover

Conspiracy theories have always been around and are an inevitable by-product of human nature. In the marketplace of ideas, it's good to have received knowledge challenged rather than just taken on faith. If the received knowledge is robust and defended by credible parties, it should easily withstand the challenge, and we benefit from being forced to examine and thus better understand the underpinnings of things we previously took for granted.

A larger problem is that many of the institutions we should be able to trust to counter conspiracy theories have badly discredited themselves over the years. For example, I agree with you about vaccines, but let's recall that the Tuskegee Experiment was not terminated until the 1970's, and only after word of it leaked out. The responsibility of the Alex Joneses of the world for the anti-vaxxer phenomenon pales in comparison to that of the so-called U.S. Public Health Service which ran the experiment.

In other words, conspiracy theories are like an infectious agent that is always omnipresent in the environment and can even strengthen the immune system (per the "hygiene hypothesis"), whereas institutional self-discrediting is like HIV which destroys protective mechanisms. It is an error to focus concern on the inevitable infectious agents rather than on the HIV.

cloudtrapezer (756 posts) • -2

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

herenow (357 posts) • 0

Although upon reflection, I will concede that the first paragraph of my earlier post at least bordered on sounding cliched and/or didactic.

Geezer (1953 posts) • -2

@lemon lover
As you mentioned me I decided not to ignore your opinion and ideologically driven comments. To make your point you conflate my views on Climate Change, which is a debate on scientific observation and interpretation, and my slight preference for Trump over Clinton. Your logic is interesting as much as it is faulty.

On Trump; I was, prior to his nomination, a never Trump guy. After his nomination, my Classical Liberal, or Jeffersonian Liberal, thinker and as I am a seeker of Liberty and Freedom, I concluded that Trump was the lessor bad choice.

In the nearly 22 months in office, Trump has led the US to these results: Lowest ever black unemployment rate, lowest ever Hispanic unemployment, lowest women unemployment in 60 years, the Korean War is over, the US economy is doing quite well, taxes at 60 year low, ISIS obliterated, US is becoming energy independent.

My opinion of the Trump persona has not changed much but he has been effective. I can live with more people working, fewer people on food stamps, and people of color and all Americans doing better.

Where is the conspiracy?

As to Climate Change, well, climate has been changing for at least 4 billion years without human input and it will continue to change regardless of what humans do.

Debating the science of Climate Change, or Paleontology, is a worthy endeavor. In as much as science is a mode of inquiry the debate ought to be on the facts, observations and interpretations of the results of scientific inquiry.

Full disclosure: I know relatively little of climate science or Paleontology but I am curious enough to read, watch videos, and with the time I have I do a lot of both.

In either of these discussion there is a lot of opinions held. There is no “science” in name calling, or maligning opinions, or disparaging how opinions, or who holds them, are arrived at. There is no “science” in opinion polls, save in methodology, or in consensus claims. The “scientific mode of inquiry” actually demands doubt, skepticism and further research.

If you doubt this, it is best to remember it was once the consensus was that the sun revolved around a flat earth. It is consensus that can be wrong or dangerous.

@lemon, your forum tactic is ideology driven. You conflate topics and opinions recklessly. You create nonexistent relationships, ascribe them to those you disagree with, then ridicule both your asserted nonsense and those you have tagged.

I believe you when you say free speech has nothing to do with it. You simply do not want anyone with an opinion on climate, fossils, dinosaurs, politics or Trump to express them. Bagging opinions and ideas you dislike into the conspiracy (pejorative) bag may satisfy your need to castrate opinions but doesn’t convince anyone that thinks.

Related forum threads

Login to post

This thread is locked.