Post by Michael on Mar 31, 2007 18:48:07 GMT -5
[Originally posted September 10, 2006 - Edited March 31, 2007]
Tips for the serious Lindbergh Kidnapping Researcher:
Quite often those attempting to debate various angles of this case purposely create a false dichotomy. The choice is either:
Usually, there is some kind of unpleasant adjective associated with "them" in an attempt to make the decision an easy one.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granfalloon
Most people aren't on any side but try to work through the evidence piece by piece as an intelligent individual. The best bet when attempting to get a grasp upon the 'evidence' as coming from a particular personality on the message boards (among other places) is to weigh it against the person its coming from. For example, where did one get his/her information? Is it from personal research, or it is from someone else's book or research?
A real big issue is context. Another is to apply all variables and circumstances and not just the one's you like. When researching this case one has a tendency to like a certain position then attempt to support it by pointing out things that assist it but shrugging off those points that don't. Its called observational selection. Should someone come along, such as myself, and point out this bit of inconsistency, they are usually told these omitted facts are "trivial," or "unimportant" and then draw some sort of an attack, via direct, insinuation, or otherwise, for making the flaw known. The purpose of the attack it usually two-fold.
Beware of these undermining, counter-productive, and Busch-League tactics. Try to the best of your ability to be fair and consistent in applying suggestions, speculation, and evidence to your personal research and philosophies.
And for God's sake, avoid at all costs becoming a Member of some silly Granfalloon.
Tips for the serious Lindbergh Kidnapping Researcher:
Quite often those attempting to debate various angles of this case purposely create a false dichotomy. The choice is either:
1. You are with "us"
2. You are with "them"
Usually, there is some kind of unpleasant adjective associated with "them" in an attempt to make the decision an easy one.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granfalloon
Most people aren't on any side but try to work through the evidence piece by piece as an intelligent individual. The best bet when attempting to get a grasp upon the 'evidence' as coming from a particular personality on the message boards (among other places) is to weigh it against the person its coming from. For example, where did one get his/her information? Is it from personal research, or it is from someone else's book or research?
A real big issue is context. Another is to apply all variables and circumstances and not just the one's you like. When researching this case one has a tendency to like a certain position then attempt to support it by pointing out things that assist it but shrugging off those points that don't. Its called observational selection. Should someone come along, such as myself, and point out this bit of inconsistency, they are usually told these omitted facts are "trivial," or "unimportant" and then draw some sort of an attack, via direct, insinuation, or otherwise, for making the flaw known. The purpose of the attack it usually two-fold.
1. Punishment
2. Attempt to Discredit
Beware of these undermining, counter-productive, and Busch-League tactics. Try to the best of your ability to be fair and consistent in applying suggestions, speculation, and evidence to your personal research and philosophies.
And for God's sake, avoid at all costs becoming a Member of some silly Granfalloon.