J
Joe
Guest
Well its up to them to do a little digging themselves .I think exploring possibilities are nice. If you think some investigations are incomplete, there is no harm into looking into it a little further.
However, I think it's worthwhile to do so with good reason too. If the investigations are incomplete, then you ask yourself why? What part of it is incomplete? What part of the investigation is invalid? And before you start coming up with a new theory, you also need to consider if alternatives make sense in the framework they are in. White streaks in the air for instance. There are a lot of conspiracy theorists who haven't really considered if it's possible for condensation to form, persist, and last, and I think this is where reasoning goes outfield.
As for Alex Jones... uh, ahem, I think he is one of those people that you should be critical about. Please, please, please do be critical about him. Yes, he thinks outside of the box, but the stuff he comes out with isn't in-line with reason. He comes up with stuff and draw weak connections between facts. How many predictions have he made that simply weren't true? Yeah it's nice to think outside of the box sometimes, but one should consider the overall picture too without ignoring the facts. When you make an argument with another party, you have to consider the opposing point of view too before you have any hope of coming out with the winning solution. Alex Jones answers questions, but he answers questions that people want, and he really doesn't tie them into any relevant facts.