They may be as intelligent but do they have common sense?
Personally conspiracy theories don't wash. I prefer at least some tangible
evidence to support an argument or a fact. For example " Man didnt land on
the moon because the Flag was rigid and there can be no wind without
gravity" Well that falls flat straight away because solar winds do exist,
the moon does have a gravitational pull on it all be it about 1/10th our own
and the flag was I believe starched to stay open for the media.
I think within archaeology when we make deductions from artefacts we can be
a million miles from the truth however the hard facts that we build that
erroneous data from are the artefacts themselves. We do however over the
years change these assumptions and deductions as more
evidence/artefacts/inscriptions etc come available. Off the top of my head
the best example would be the dating of the construction of the Roman Walls
around Londinium which initially started at about 150AD and is now believed
to be nearer 220AD.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Briggs" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] The fringe
> David Bowler wrote:
>> List members have rightly pointed out that people attracted to fringe
>> conspiracy theories are usually just as intelligent as other people,
>> and that it's at least partly about access to education.
> That is an unproven assertion.
> John Briggs
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.4/375 - Release Date: 25/06/2006