Originally Posted by healthsci1

the level of bigotry in your post is disgusting. You constantly throw insults and are exhibiting extreme primate-like behaviour. You put yourself on some sort of pedestal by questioning the intelligence of others. My advice is to look in the mirror, your posts scream nothing but idiocy.

Stop trying to sound smart kiddo, you do a horrendous, and I mean HORRENDOUS job. You've already shown this whole board your intelligence level by making this thread.

Originally Posted by Souldier

/facepalm, there's nothing worse than conspiracy nutjobs

Originally Posted by Souldier

I seriously question the intelligence of anyone who has even a remote suspicion as to if any of this HAARP garbage is true...oh....you're in health sci, that explains a lot. The fact that you even thought this drivel was interesting and worthy of a thread...quite frankly, pisses me off and makes me lose faith in humanity.

Originally Posted by Souldier

Jesus christ, I'm honestly surprised some of you even remember to breathe. You're living in a fantasy world, thinking there's more to things than there actually is, probably because you're unsatisfied with your boring and mundane life.

Do you believe in:
An alien race of reptiles controlling everything?
That men didn't actually land on the moon?
Any of this HAARP bs?
9/11 was an inside job?
If you said yes to any of the above, sorry, but you are a moron and I'm embarrassed to go to the same university as you.

Originally Posted by Souldier

Stop trying to sound smart kiddo, you do a horrendous, and I mean HORRENDOUS job. You've already shown this whole board your intelligence level by making this thread.

Excuse me sir, but it has come to my attention that you may have forgotten to append the following image to all your posts:

Originally Posted by jo87

I think it's sad when people automatically call conspiracy theories crazy and stupid. I personally love to think about things beyond what CNN reports, but that's just me. I find thinking outside the box a lot more rewarding. People need to stop being lazy thinkers, but sadly I think thats what our type of education system creates, our society encourages lazy thinking. Even if you don't believe it, do some research and make your own conclusion. If you're in university you should be able to do that.

Sorry if some responses appear unduly dismissive; it just some of us have encountered the same type of nonsense thousands of times elseware and our rubbish detection mechanism in our brain can zip past all the crap and get to the general validity of a claim.

Pretty much any news station that clouds the reporting with opinion (CNN) isn't that great, but if you're well equipped enough intellectually, it shouldn't matter. I don't think many people are well equipped though.

Originally Posted by Souldier

Stop trying to sound smart kiddo, you do a horrendous, and I mean HORRENDOUS job. You've already shown this whole board your intelligence level by making this thread.

You're so dramatic...CHILL OUT. Kiddo you're the perfect example of how a person should not act. McMaster needs to screen applicants better.

Originally Posted by huzaifa47

Firstly here :http://www.venezuelanalysis. com/analysis/5117

And secondly they are "propaganda pieces" why?

You just generally made a statement in that regards without mentioning any specific reason other then your opinion, which doesn't really contribute much to the discussion.

While I'm skeptical of all media, publications from these countries are certainly more suspect than others with very low Press Freedom Index Rankings (Venezuela 124, Russia 153, China 168 and Iran 172), and a history of tight control by the government, and government connected individuals and all tend to publish outlandish, highly improbable stories against enemies of their country. It goes beyond bias and into the realm of trying to whip up nationalistic rage.

While I don't dismiss something out of hand that comes in one of these publications, I certainly don't accept it as proof in and of itself.

And why is it that the argument cannot be spun around and used against Fox, MSNBC & CNN!(All three of whom I know you haven't mentioned but can still be used for arguments sake). Same with BBC & Al Jazeera, what makes you think they are any less unbiased then the media from the "Axis or Evil" & current communist regimes?

I don't think they're even in the same ball park. Media bias is a completely different species than propaganda. Everyone has bias. Usually towards our country and towards our particular views. But yet Fox is critical of the current American administration. Surely if they were American Government propaganda they would've woken up with a new editorial view point the day after Obama won the election?

Meanwhile the media in these countries exist not so much much as a "fourth estate" full of a ride range of biases and viewpoints holding the government accountable and reporting responsibly on world affairs but as an extension of the governments communication program.

Heck you will be surprised if you do a random pop poll on the name "Al Jazeera" as a new source and see how people classify it as a "Al Qaeda/Arab" Propaganda machine based entirely on its name. I even had a TA last year tell me I should "avoid" Al Jazeera as a source for anything because its "arab" and hence incredibly biased. I am assuming she doesn't really know how a few Arab countries have tried to ban that channel because it was so critical of them.

And we should base our opinions, because a large number of uninformed individuals hold an incorrect view.

If this forum was for a university in Stalingrad they would e saying the same about the sources you are mentioning.

These days they wouldn't have much choice.

Hence exactly why I prefer to take in multiple sides of the argument/sources before I make my mind up. Sometimes I end up with the "Evil" media outlets and sometimes with the "good" guys, it depends!

In other words should you read the sources you have targeted they will say exactly the same things about North American/EU Media outlets as propagating biased propaganda against them.

It's not that I disregard other views, but I am more (or should I say extra) skeptical for the reasons I mentioned above, of the things they claim, especially when they are way out there and fit in nicely with an agenda.

Originally Posted by arathbon

all tend to publish outlandish, highly improbable stories against enemies of their country. It goes beyond bias and into the realm of trying to whip up nationalistic rage.

And other media doesn't?

[quote]While I don't dismiss something out of hand that comes in one of these publications, I certainly don't accept it as proof in and of itself.[quote]

That's exactly what I said! Take information from both sides and take neither as proof! Then make your own conclusions.

I don't think they're even in the same ball park. Media bias is a completely different species than propaganda. Everyone has bias. Usually towards our country and towards our particular views. But yet Fox is critical of the current American administration. Surely if they were American Government propaganda they would've woken up with a new editorial view point the day after Obama won the election?

Fox is supposedly a Republican and Conservative mouthpiece: Glen Beck? MSNBC is supposed to be a democratic/liberal one. I never said these media organizations are directly under the "USA" Banner. It all comes down to where the funding is coming from in the background.

"Media Bias" is also ~ Propaganda since it affects public opinion the same way.

These days they wouldn't have much choice.

Of course they won't. Ever been to Russia? Or Is that what something you read/is believed popularly in certain media sources?

especially when they are way out there and fit in nicely with an agenda.

Like the existence of WMD's? As I said everything you say can be flipped around. If Britain was sending troops to the middle east do you seriously think they(BBC) will be hugely critical of the entire affair and whisteblow the government statements? NO They would say things that fit in with the government "agenda"; after all they are a state broadcasting network.

I was gonna go off on a rant, but almost miraculously, Macinsiders had a 'server is too busy' message...now I can't really be arsed.

Originally Posted by Souldier

Jesus christ, I'm honestly surprised some of you even remember to breathe. You're living in a fantasy world, thinking there's more to things than there actually is, probably because you're unsatisfied with your boring and mundane life.

Or is it that you're desperately clinging to your mundane life, wishing that's all there was to it? You've never met my mother, can you therefore conclude that she does not exist? Or myself, how can you be certain I'm a physical entity typing this? Perhaps I wrote a program to write this for me (unlikely, but not impossible).

Here's just one example:

That men didn't actually land on the moon?

While I'm not saying I believe the conspiracy theory, its formulation has brought about a whole slew of questions which have actually advanced the prospects of further space travel. (That's what scientific research is after all...asking the right questions, then attempting to answer them) The whole Van Allen Belt thing is quite an important consideration, quite an obstacle to space travel as the shuttlecraft must meet certain specs to ensure the safety of the astronauts.

Now I'm not saying I'm an astrophysics major, or a NASA employee, but I know a valid concern when I see it. It's by no means a stretch of the imagination to consider the possibility that this very real hurdle, has not yet been surpassed by scientific technology.

That is a step in the right direction...not immediately dismissing any concerns people may have. You sound an awful lot like the professor who just rolls his eyes when a student has a question...and for that, namely your ridiculously absurd attitude, I must say, I'm embarrassed to go to the same university as you. So much so that I'm actually going to go to the effort of logging into my UserCP and blocking your posts, on a forum that I don't take seriously and hardly ever have time to visit.

Originally Posted by huzaifa47

And other media doesn't?

Let me know when The New York Times or the Toronto Star accuse Russia or China of being the cause of natural disasters.

That's exactly what I said! Take information from both sides and take neither as proof! Then make your own conclusions.

Ummm It was exactly what I said and you sprung after me in defense of the countries I had mentioned. All i'm saying is that articles from media outlets from these countries make me extra skeptical because of the problems I have mentioned.

Fox is supposedly a Republican and Conservative mouthpiece: Glen Beck? MSNBC is supposed to be a democratic/liberal one. I never said these media organizations are directly under the "USA" Banner. It all comes down to where the funding is coming from in the background.

"Media Bias" is also ~ Propaganda since it affects public opinion the same way.

Media Bias ~ Propaganda. Media Bias is compensated for by the fact that every media source has its own bias. In countries such as Canada we have a wide range of biases in different sources. With Propaganda there is one bias and that's in favor of the government. There is also a difference in veracity between the two. Media bias generally does not lead to fabrication of stories, although it may lead to unintentional or occasionally even intentional ignorance of inconvenient facts, while propaganda outlets tend to disregard in some cases even the veneer of accuracy. If a media outlet were to make up facts in North America, you can bet there'd be every other media outlet sharpening their knives.

Of course they won't. Ever been to Russia? Or Is that what something you read/is believed popularly in certain media sources?

The beautiful thing about propaganda is you don't need to have men with guns in every room to deny free thinking.

Like the existence of WMD's? As I said everything you say can be flipped around.

Didn't the media expose this big flaw in the government's arguments?

If Britain was sending troops to the middle east

DOH!

do you seriously think they(BBC) will be hugely critical of the entire affair and whisteblow the government statements? NO They would say things that fit in with the government "agenda"; after all they are a state broadcasting network.

Yes, yes they are very critical of the government's foreign policy. And yes they are a state owned broadcasting network, but unlike the countries I mentioned above, and similar to Canada, the government has no direct control over the output of the state broadcaster.

To those who responded and have had replies removed, please adhere to the Code Of Conduct. This thread has been closed.