Conspiracy "theories"

[devnull]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Balloon manufacturing plant maybe? 

 

 

(And this was discovered in 2019 not this year)

Amazon fulfillment center

[Spartacus]

6 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Balloon manufacturing plant maybe? 

 

 

(And this was discovered in 2019 not this year)

no surprise, since the moon is a hollow, unnatural structure

[Nouseforaname]

3 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

no surprise, since the moon is a hollow, unnatural structure

Just like the inside of your head.

[4merper4mer]

18 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Just like the inside of your head.

Nice discourse.

 

He is rubber….you are glue

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

38 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Just like the inside of your head.

 

Once significant difference: unlike the moon, Spartacus' head exists.  WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

[Nouseforaname]

25 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Nice discourse.

 

He is rubber….you are glue

Just wait until he calls me a shill for the moon landing industry.

[Nouseforaname]

40 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Once significant difference: unlike the moon, Spartacus' head exists.  WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Are you sure ?

[Koko]

On 2/16/2023 at 9:36 PM, Nouseforaname said:

Are you sure ?

 

Don't tell me you were taken in by the Reptoid conspiracy to project a false moon in the sky?!?

[Spartacus]

41 minutes ago, Koko said:

 

Don't tell me you were taken in by the Reptoid conspiracy to project a false moon in the sky?!?

easily fooled

it's hollow to house the Reptoids

not a projection

[B-Man]

 

 

[Cinga]

Interesting, an interactive map of man-made disasters in 2022.... Conspiracy???????????

 

https://www.zeemaps.com/view?group=4410859&x=-89.849631&y=44.059004&z=14

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

10 hours ago, Cinga said:

Interesting, an interactive map of man-made disasters in 2022.... Conspiracy???????????

 

https://www.zeemaps.com/view?group=4410859&x=-89.849631&y=44.059004&z=14

 

 

Selection bias.

 

Quote

PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING IT MUST HAVE A LINK FOR THE PROOF OR I WON'T PUT IT ON THE MAP BECAUSE I CANNOT PROVE IT.

 

[Cinga]

1 hour ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Selection bias.

 

 

 

And? Did you find some of them wrong?

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

1 minute ago, Cinga said:

 

And? Did you find some of them wrong?

 

No.  But it's not a conspiracy when an monolingual American managing the map focuses on American reports and not, say, Chinese reports.

[Cinga]

4 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

No.  But it's not a conspiracy when an monolingual American managing the map focuses on American reports and not, say, Chinese reports.

 

Or could it be he doesn't get as many Chinese reports? 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

Just now, Cinga said:

 

Or could it be he doesn't get as many Chinese reports? 

 

That would be selection bias.

[Cinga]

4 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

That would be selection bias.

 

For sure! Just because the Chinese government limits what their people see and can respond to, that surely proves selection bias 

That deserves a

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

5 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

For sure! Just because the Chinese government limits what their people see and can respond to, that surely proves selection bias 

That deserves a

 

 

 

Because he's soliciting information from a group limited by significant constraints that end up self-selecting for American incidents.

 

I only chose "Chinese" because it's unlikely that an American can fluently read Chinese reports.  But if you want, you can choose French, Czech, Italian, Indian, Syrian...same thing.  He solicits from a group that self-selects for American incidents.  

 

The only conspiracy here is the conspiracy to grossly misunderstand statistical methods and fallacies.

 

Alternately, you're claiming there is, among other things, a massive conspiracy to hack grain silos in Iowa - 100 ransomware attacks of grain producers and distributors in Iowa, but only five other hacks in the rest of the world.  And that's ridiculous.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Crap Throwing Clavin

[Fansince88]

31 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

 

Because he's soliciting information from a group limited by significant constraints that end up self-selecting for American incidents.

 

I only chose "Chinese" because it's unlikely that an American can fluently read Chinese reports.  But if you want, you can choose French, Czech, Italian, Indian, Syrian...same thing.  He solicits from a group that self-selects for American incidents.  

 

The only conspiracy here is the conspiracy to grossly misunderstand statistical methods and fallacies.

 

Alternately, you're claiming there is, among other things, a massive conspiracy to hack grain silos in Iowa - 100 ransomware attacks of grain producers and distributors in Iowa, but only five other hacks in the rest of the world.  And that's ridiculous.

Im lost.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

21 minutes ago, Fansince88 said:

Im lost.

 

Simpler example.

 

Remember some 35-40 years ago, local news used to have those "What do you think about this topic?  Call this number for "for," this number for "against."  (E.g. are you pro-choice or pro-life?  Always a popular one.)  Kick off the 11pm news with that, report the results at the end.  End up with something like "65% are pro-life, 35% are pro-choice."

 

The problem with that is that it's not a random sampling.  It's a sampling of people who are 1) awake and watching the news (and more particularly, watching Irv Weinstein instead of Bob Koop or Jackie Walker), and 2) cared enough to call.  So the numbers didn't represent "65% of people are pro-life," but "65% of people who are watching our news program at 11pm and care enough to call in are pro-life."

 

Same basic principle at work here: a methodology for accepting reports that self-selects for English-language sources, and largely American sources.  Of course the map is going to focus overwhelmingly on American incidents - and not just that, but American incidents that people care to report to the manager of that map.  The hacking data makes it abundantly clear:

 

 

That cluster through Iowa and southern Minnesota is hacks and ransomware attacks mostly against grain providers, from two different articles (feedandgrain.com, and world-grain.com).  But according to that map, there were only five other cybersecurity incidents world-wide in 2021-2022?  And none in, for example, California, or Maryland (and I personally know of one in Baltimore that's not reported on the map, btw)?

 

That's selection bias.  The curator of this map can only report on what he's informed about.  And his information is incomplete, because of his data collection mechanics.  And I hold him blameless for that, btw...of course he can only report what he knows.  But it still imposes a serious limitation on what this map can actually tell you - and the only pattern you can reliably derive from it is a pattern of reporting, not of actual incidents.