Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is a theory, yet it’s widely accepted as a scientific truth because it’s supported by fact and believable evidence. Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is also a theory that’s supported by scientific assumption and plausible evidence. Given these two examples, why do the majority of Bush followers refuse to accept the fact-based theory and compelling evidence to support the premise that President Bush invaded Iraq to ensure that the major oil corporations reaped the benefits of controlling Iraq’s oil?
http://www.platformlondon.org/carbonweb/documents/PSAs_privatisation.pdf
2007-03-30 10:25:12 · 16 answers · asked by Hemingway 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Once upon a time, these were "conspiracy theories":
Watergate
Iran-Contra
the adultery of Gary Hart
the intern of Bill Clinton
the bribery of Duke Cunningham
Abscam
the list could go on forever.
2007-03-30 10:36:54 · answer #1 · answered by Studbolt Slickrock Deux 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
You'll excuse me if I bypass all the ink and stick to what I perceive to be a really good question. Honestly. You got it all right there. They're not theories. That's to sidetrack you. The idea is never to hide the facts. The bad guys are usually in a position to bombard with so many facts and asides they obfuscate the point. Subtle, huh? Look at the Noriega ' trial '. I think the evidence submitted in an up and down pile was about eight feet? Who's gonna read all that. We know. How bout some prosecution where it counts? It'd make the planet way lots quieter and more liveable. Unless you think you're going to miss a certain class of worldwide criminal conspirators who actually work together. No matter any boundaries. Big of 'em ain't it?
2007-03-30 10:31:50 · answer #2 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Darwin's and Einstein's theory have no political agenda and your conspiracy theory is a not so veiled attempt to discredit the President. Did you forget that Congress approved military action against Iraq. If all Bush wanted was the oil then why wouldn't he have made up some story about geo-thermal energy building below the surface of Anwar and it would be a catastrophic event which would lead to global temperatures of astronomical proportions, causing the glaciers to melt, the oceans to heat up, more severe storms then we have ever witnessed and yes the end of the world as we know it. And the resolution can be to drill deep wells in Anwar and release the pressure and remove some of the oil which is causing pressure and adding fuel to the already volatile Anwar region.
2007-03-30 10:38:48 · answer #3 · answered by jeff_loves_life 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
There are a bunch of things Einstein has been found to be wrong about in his theory of relativity if you study quantum physics a little bit and the theory of evolution has been completely discredited by serious scientists. So perfect examples to put along another your theory
2007-03-30 10:59:46 · answer #4 · answered by archangel72901 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You know, in reading your question, I truly thought you'd get some good answers on this one...sigh.
At this stage in the game, people will not believe solid proof of Iraq's invasion or 9/11. The problem with both is that the theorists have jumped to assign blame, instead of focusing on facts. In the case of the latter, many credible and viable findings regarding the fall of the buildings have been presented, but people won't read them or even consider them. Perhaps if it was not presented as a 'conspiracy', people might give it some thought. But the very notion that the President could be involved somehow in the deaths of thousands of his own people is too great a leap.
In order for people to learn, it must be made palatable. And the blame game attached to both these theories make them highly distasteful.
2007-03-30 10:36:05 · answer #5 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Because both Einstein and Darwin's theories can be backed up by scientific, credible facts and proof, whereas the "tinfoil hat" gang have yet to come up with anything even remotely resembling "credible."
And it ain't just "Bush followers" that think the "tinfoil hat" gang are full of it, either. I know plenty of Demoncrats that think the same thing.
2007-03-30 10:33:42 · answer #6 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Your metaphor has lost me...Einstein's theory is a fact....For the other topic you mentioned get a World Almanac for 2007 and go to World or Current events. Those are facts! We have been very gracious too! The World Trade Center twice attacked, the USS Cole, one serviceman kidnapped and shot on a TWA flight leaving Saudi...WMD's are biological and chenical that were found...Wahabist Islam...what else do you need?
2007-03-30 10:36:58 · answer #7 · answered by ShadowCat 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
actually, Einsteins "theory" of E=MC squared is science, not theory. if it can be tested and repeated by others, it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. there has been no proof of Darwin nor "Global Warming". as to the reason bush invaded Iraq, we're right back to the ad homonym attacks against a man who defeated your guy. deal with it
2007-03-30 10:30:41 · answer #8 · answered by kapute2 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The US oil companies do not control the iraqi oil supply. The iraqi's do. As to comparing a scientific theory by the greatest mind of the modern world to your conspiracy theories...PLEASE!!! LOL
2007-03-30 11:05:27 · answer #9 · answered by Steelhead 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because the evidence is NOT compelling. Hence, it's a theory but not a credible theory.
2007-03-30 10:28:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋