Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

Josh Cryer · 2002-08-24 02:47:38

Hey Adrian, how come I can only find posts dating back to a few months? Did ya turn off post archiving or whatever? (Or is it just me?)

I was looking for a post from a few months ago, but I can't find it...

Adrian · 2002-08-24 03:54:00

As far as I know, everything should still be here. For example, in this forum there are threads that date back to January. Have you tried looking on the different pages of forum indexes? For forums with large numbers of threads you'll have to go to the last page for old threads. Also, remember that the threads are sorted by date of last post, not by date of creation.

However, I've noticed that there is at least one thread - the Face on Mars one - that is going completely haywire and losing posts all over the place. I have no idea why it's happening there, because it doesn't seem to happen in any other thread. I suspect that the database entry for that thread is corrupted (perhaps due to two people trying to reply at the same time, I don't know) which has also caused inaccurate post counts. Spooky.

Can you tell me which post it is you're looking for?

Josh Cryer · 2002-08-24 13:56:38

Man Adrian, I must have been really zonked last night to have missed it. I found the post I was looking for this morning... I was looking for the Duck n Cover post, as lately Conspiracy Theorists have gotten on my nerves, and I wanted to surmise that one post where I got totally pissed.

I blame Richard C. Hoaglands latest ?epiphany.?

Palomar · 2002-08-24 15:18:40

Man Adrian, I must have been really zonked last night to have missed it. I found the post I was looking for this morning... I was looking for the Duck n Cover post, as lately Conspiracy Theorists have gotten on my nerves, and I wanted to surmise that one post where I got totally pissed.
I blame Richard C. Hoaglands latest ?epiphany.?

*And what, pray tell, is Mr. Hoaglund's "latest epiphany"? I looked for a new post from you, Josh, under "Duck-n-Cover", but didn't see any.

I generally ignore conspiracy theorists. It's not that I have anything against a healthy level of speculation, but I find people odd who are continually and always plugged into speculation, rumors, playing at cloaks and daggers, etc. And then they wonder why they are accused of being paranoid...well, duh.

A guy I used to know was always trying to get me wrapped up in his pet conspiracy theories; I told him, "Don, why do you bother with all this stuff? You can't PROVE any of it. All leads go straight into a blind alley." I guess he thinks some day it's "all going to come together" and "the truth will come out." For his sake, I hope so; he's spent most of his adult life in this manner. I haven't talked with him in years.

To each their own, of course...but conspiracy theorists get under my skin too. It is, IMO, generally a pointless waste of time.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2002-08-24 16:00:56

And what, pray tell, is Mr. Hoaglund's "latest epiphany"? I looked for a new post from you, Josh, under "Duck-n-Cover", but didn't see any.

Ahh, I didn't mean ?surmise,? I meant ?review.? My language ablities are so lacking!

Mr. Hoagland wishes to ?prove? that the Face on Mars is artifical design. You can read more about it in the ?Face on Mars? thread. (We have been discussing it there.)

I generally ignore conspiracy theorists. It's not that I have anything against a healthy level of speculation, but I find people odd who are continually and always plugged into speculation, rumors, playing at cloaks and daggers, etc.

I try to ignore them, but then they come to me. :\

To each their own, of course...but conspiracy theorists get under my skin too. It is, IMO, generally a pointless waste of time.

Well, I know what you're saying, but I don't think the converse is true. Conspiracy theorists are quite easy to debunk, and since you will inevitably bring someone over from the Dark Side, I think it's worth it, and not a waste of time, to educate those within the conspiracy theory realm.

Adrian · 2002-08-24 16:34:08

There's an interesting cognitive theory on the mindset of conspiracy theorists. Essentially, it states that humans have a threshold at which 'noise' becomes a signal, and that conspiracy theorists have an especially low threshold. So a person with a high threshold, when looking up into the sky, might simply see clouds, whereas someone with a low threshold sees a face. Ditto for Mars This is a particularly attractive theory because it's well known that humans are very good at identifying salient signals within noise, e.g. being able to see the face of a lion hidden behind leaves is an obviously useful evolutionary trait. Indeed, our skill at finding signals is so good that often we see signals where there are none.

I also heard another theory espoused by Prof. Ramachandran, who I worked with in San Diego this summer, in which he believes one of the brain's cerebral hemispheres (I forget which) acts as a 'regulator' on the other hemisphere, which regularly believes anything and everything told to it.

Phobos · 2002-08-24 17:06:49

I also heard another theory espoused by Prof. Ramachandran, who I worked with in San Diego this summer, in which he believes one of the brain's cerebral hemispheres (I forget which) acts as a 'regulator' on the other hemisphere, which regularly believes anything and everything told to it.

Interesting theory. There are certainly people out there who seem to be missing the regulatory half of their brain.

I generally ignore conspiracy theorists. It's not that I have anything against a healthy level of speculation, but I find people odd who are continually and always plugged into speculation, rumors, playing at cloaks and daggers, etc. And then they wonder why they are accused of being paranoid...well, duh.

What's your favorite conspiracy theory? I read one once that claimed the Free Masons actually run NASA and that in the 1960's they used one of the Saturn V launches to send people to Mars and not the Moon. As evidence, he pointed out that some star was 33 degrees separated from the moon at the time of launch and that there was evidence for some high Masonic ritual the night before the launch at NASA, etc. It was funny as hell and the guy was dead serious.

Palomar · 2002-08-24 19:33:48

ME: To each their own, of course...but conspiracy theorists get under my skin too. It is, IMO, generally a pointless waste of time.

JOSH: Well, I know what you're saying, but I don't think the converse is true. Conspiracy theorists are quite easy to debunk, and since you will inevitably bring someone over from the Dark Side, I think it's worth it, and not a waste of time, to educate those within the conspiracy theory realm.

*To be quite honest, I don't have the level of patience that would require.

ADRIAN: I also heard another theory espoused by Prof. Ramachandran, who I worked with in San Diego this summer, in which he believes one of the brain's cerebral hemispheres (I forget which) acts as a 'regulator' on the other hemisphere, which regularly believes anything and everything told to it.

PHOBOS: Interesting theory. There are certainly people out there who seem to be missing the regulatory half of their brain.

*Lol!!!

ME: I generally ignore conspiracy theorists. It's not that I have anything against a healthy level of speculation, but I find people odd who are continually and always plugged into speculation, rumors, playing at cloaks and daggers, etc. And then they wonder why they are accused of being paranoid...well, duh.

PHOBOS: What's your favorite conspiracy theory?

*It's got to be the "moonlanding hoax" theory. Right: Like scores of professional journalists, the scientific elite [not to mention scientists who examined the moon rocks brought back], and governmental officials in the USA and around the globe were all either duped by the persons doing the hoaxing, or were in on the "fraud" -- even to the point of absolutely jeopardizing their careers to go along with "the joke." Give me a break. No hoax of this magnitude, especially with all the highly trained and intelligent people involved, could have been pulled off. Besides, astronomers [amateur and professional] tracked the Apollo craft hurtling away from the Earth with their telescopes...I mean WAY out, beyond the point of aborting the mission and splashing down prematurely.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2002-08-24 20:06:43

What's your favorite conspiracy theory?

My favorite, and most hated BTW, conspiracy theory, would have to be the whole, ?NASA is a lie,? dealie. That NASA is covering every indication of alien life up, etc. Really stupid.

Adrian · 2002-08-25 04:15:59

I'll have to agree with Cindy on the favorite conspiracy theory - the Moon Landing hoax. The whole 'alien life' conspiracy comes a close second, but it misses out on the first place since the Moon Landing hoax is, on the surface, much more convincing.

The thing that bothers me about the Moon Landing 'hoax' is that there are continually TV programmes on it, while there are rarely any programmes aired countering the hoax. Hence every so often I'll have highly educated friends - physics majors from Oxford! - asking me what I think about it. I merely shake my head in deep sorrow, lamenting at the state of the world today, and point them towards the NASA rebuttal.

Phobos · 2002-08-25 17:19:09

If the moon landings were a hoax then one has to ask why the Soviets were so quiet about it. If anybody would have loved the chance to expose an "imperialist" fraud the Soviets certainly would. And it's no problem tracking a spacecraft since the Americans confirmed the Soviets were the first to crash an object into the moon by tracking Luna 2's signals in 1959. The Soviets could have done the same with the Apollo spacecraft. And I agree that it's sad that people are so quick to accept the claims of these hoax mongers who are just in it to sell their propaganda usually.

Palomar · 2002-08-25 18:05:01

If the moon landings were a hoax then one has to ask why the Soviets were so quiet about it. If anybody would have loved the chance to expose an "imperialist" fraud the Soviets certainly would. And it's no problem tracking a spacecraft since the Americans confirmed the Soviets were the first to crash an object into the moon by tracking Luna 2's signals in 1959. The Soviets could have done the same with the Apollo spacecraft. And I agree that it's sad that people are so quick to accept the claims of these hoax mongers who are just in it to sell their propaganda usually.

*That is an EXCELLENT point you make, Phobos: Yes indeed, at the height of the Cold War and the intense rivalry between the US and USSR, they would've LOVED to have revealed the Apollo program as one gigantic hoax.

Besides [as I neglected to point out in my post yesterday], there wasn't just one moon landing -- there were, what, 5 or 6 of them, spanning 3-4 years. We're supposed to believe a multihoax spanning years went on, and the scientific elite and governmental officials went along and/or were duped? And, of course, the hoax conspiracists are automatically suggesting all Apollo astronauts were habitual liars. It's ridiculous.

But you're right...their conspiracy theories rake in lots of money [however, I don't doubt that some of these goofballs are serious, and would peddle their notions without benefit of dollar signs].

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-08-24 02:47:38

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#2 2002-08-24 03:54:00

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#3 2002-08-24 13:56:38

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#4 2002-08-24 15:18:40

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#5 2002-08-24 16:00:56

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#6 2002-08-24 16:34:08

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#7 2002-08-24 17:06:49

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#8 2002-08-24 19:33:48

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#9 2002-08-24 20:06:43

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#10 2002-08-25 04:15:59

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#11 2002-08-25 17:19:09

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

#12 2002-08-25 18:05:01

Re: Where are all the old posts? - ...they seem to be missing.

Board footer