Reply #123: David Hume: "On miracles"

[MervinFerd]

Ernest,

I think you refer to Hume's famous essay "On Miracles", in which Hume argues that there can never be enough historical evidence to prove that a miracle actually occurred because it is more probable that evidence was faked or misunderstood than that an actual miracle occured. "Which is more probable--That Nature should run out of her course, or that a man should lie?"

A similar argument, I think applies to ALL conspiracy theories. BY DEFINITION, a conspiracy theory requires a secret, nefarious and virtually all-powerful entity that can do things impossible to mortal men. If the 'theory' were not impossible on its face, it could be discussed seriously and not ridiculed as a 'conspiracy theory'. No evidence can ever prove such a theory because it is always more probable that the evidence is faked, misinterpreted, irrelevant than that there are secret organizations that possess supernatural powers.

The personnel of the Conspiracy have traditionally been Jews, Communists, FreeMasons, Liberals, Blacks, etc. These theories have been the staple of the Far Right and of scoundrels of all sorts at least since the invention of mass media. The adoption of Conspiracism by (supposedly) left elements is a new, distressing and destructive development. These theories are NOT just another legitimate point of view.

------

I think you accept as fact some assertions that have been thoroughly debunked already.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
http://www.911myths.com/
(and many others).

<<There were numerous reports of explosions below the impact points at the time the towers were hit. Others report that there were explosions before the planes hit.>>
By Whom? Does this make any kind of sense?

<<Tapes of interviews with air traffic controllers were destroyed.>>
Sez who? And what of it? Are the traffic controllers dead? If they know some awful secret wouldn't they come forward?


<<When news of the attack reached the Florida school where Bush was visiting, the Secret Service failed to remove the president from that previously publicized location.>>

Only the MSM and the Conspiracy Hobbyists ever said these guys were bright.

<<There was a flood of "put options" (anticipations of loss) on American Airlines and United Airlines stock, within the week before 9/11.>>

Debunked many times. There was a spike, but not anything that unusual. And any actual activity could more probably be attributed to Saudis with inside knowledge than to Mr. Bush.

<<Several prominent individuals, among them San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and John Ashcroft were warned not to fly on 9/11. In addition, events involving other key individuals were "rescheduled" away from the WTC on 9/11.>>

Untrue. And does this make sense? Why would the admin warn Willie Brown? And if you started warning high officials, what is the chance there would ANY passengers on any plane that day?

<<Prof. Steven Jones, to my mind the most credible of the 911 critics, claims that melted and congealed steel was found in the rubble, and that it originated at the base of the standing buildings. The only plausible cause of melting with these properties, Jones claims, would be a high temperature explosive such as thermite. Jones is well-qualified to make this assessment. He is a professor of physics at Brigham Young University, with a specialty in metal-catalyzed fusion.>>

The world community of architects and structural engineers--the people who actually know something about these issues---have a KEEN interest in the collapse of those buildings. If there really were anything remarkable about the collapse of ANY of those buildings that community would be all over it. The exact mechanism of collapse may not be known, but it is very clear that there were multiple POSSIBLE mechanisms. "Thermite" planted in the burning building by invisible Jewish elves would be pretty far down the list of possible causes.

And, again, does this story make any kind of sense? Why would the hypothetical Nefarious Govt Agency bother to plant thermite to cause the collapse of an already gutted building. And how could that possibly have been accomplished?

Prof Jones teaches at a Mormon University and his "metal-catalyzed fusion" is better known as "Cold Fusion", a notorious scientific fraud. That doesn't make his arguments invalid, but suggests we shouldn't rely on his unsubstantiated authority. He is, after all, a lone voice against many thousands of better qualified voices.