The Illuminati and other Conspiracy Theories thread

[Famine]

Was this like your eight-grade?

http://www.bullittcountyhistory.com/bchistory/schoolexam1912.html

Obviously it tested some things that were more relevant at that time than now, and it should not be used to compare student knowledge then and now.

I have two degrees too. I have a Bachelor of Science in Molecular Biology and Genetics and a Master of Science in Human Genetics and Disease. My socio-economic background is lower middle-class from Northern industrial city and I was the first member of my family to even enter university.

It's also worth a note that the knowledge underpinning my degrees didn't even exist 80 years ago. DNA wasn't even discovered until 70 years ago. While there may be gaps in present day knowledge that would make doing that 8th grade (Year 9 equivalent) test difficult for a modern 14 year old, the words and concepts used in tests for present-day 14 year olds may as well be a different language for kids from 100 years since.

 

[homeforsummer]

So you've got 2 degrees. Firstly I don't know your socio-economic level, secondly don't know what your degrees are in; possibly knitting and media studies ? I don't know. Just because you got 2 doesn't make you smarter than someone who has 1 or even 0.

Business and journalism. It's made me particularly good at knowing when someone is talking crap.

I'm also middle class. Parents work in computing and teaching. All of their parents worked in teaching.

Was this like your eight-grade?

http://www.bullittcountyhistory.com/bchistory/schoolexam1912.html

Unused measurements and language aside, the sort of questions in that test look little different from the sort of questions I'd have done in school. Most are basic arithmetic. Others look a little tougher, though I've never been particularly mathematically astute anyway. I'm better with language, hence my career choice.

Though my math skills are enough to notice that that exam paper is from 102 years ago, not 80...

Shallow examination of the facts. Firstly, you don't know how deep or shallow I have studied the facts. So we've already determined your educational level.

Nice way to not actually refute anything I said.

Polio - I think you'll find a number of polio-vaccines have actually caused numerous other problems

http://nsnmc.me/2013/08/08/bill-gates-polio-vaccine-program-caused-47500-cases-of-paralysis-death/

Linky no worky.

I had TB two years ago, I had a vaccination when I was at school. That didn't work then, did it? This is not a support for me, just interesting. I'll present proper proofs if required.

Ah, first hand evidence based on a case study of one. That pretty much backs up my shallow examination of the evidence statement. It also completely ignores that cases of TB - among myriad other diseases - have dropped by incredibly large numbers since vaccination became available to large swathes of the population.

And yes, you are required to post "proper proofs". That's how it works when you present unsubstantiated claims as fact.

It's also worth a note that the knowledge underpinning my degrees didn't even exist 80 years ago. DNA wasn't even discovered until 70 years ago.

Indeed - I notice he ignored a similar statement in my own post.

 

[Enemem]

http://nsnbc.me/2013/05/08/bill-gates-polio-vaccine-program-caused-47500-cases-of-paralysis-death/

Sorry. Copy paste issue on zx81. I'll study your answers now.

Case study is one ! Like your answer for educational standards. Case study of one. Like for like.

Talking crap. Plenty of journalists talk crap, as you well know.

Most high school students couldn't answer the questions, so maybe you're fairly academic.

Okay some fair points there about how grandad studied stuff that we didn't and vice versa. So I need so more stuff, since you haven't actually proved that I'm wrong, or come up with any stats etc.

In the meantime, maybe you want to chew on this for a while.

What is my positive intention for discussing this ?
What is your positive intention ?

We'll maybe throw that one out to the audience.

Interesting that you're the smartest in your family, Good for you, (serves you right for saying it.

In fact, exclusion of key math concepts is commonplace under Common Core. The Pioneer Institutes examination of Common Core revealed the following deficiencies:

• Common Core fails to teach prime factorization and consequently does not include teaching about least common denominators or greatest common factors.
• Common Core fails to include conversions among fractions, decimals, and percents, identified as a key skill by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Common Core de-emphasizes algebraic manipulation, which is a prerequisite for advanced mathematics, and instead effectively redefines algebra as “functional algebra”, which does not prepare students for STEM careers.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core starts teaching decimals only in grade 4, about two years behind the more rigorous state standards, and fails to use money as a natural introduction to this concept.
• Common Core fails to teach in K-8 about key geometrical concepts such as the area of a triangle, sum of angles in a triangle, isosceles and equilateral triangles, or constructions with a straightedge and compass that good state standards include.

Additionally I found more examples of Common Core taking student achievement backwards through delaying when children which type of math.

• The mathematics standards place Algebra I in ninth grade, rather than in grade 8 where it has traditionally been taught. This fact guarantees that the majority of students will not reach calculus in high school.
• The standards require the teaching of geometry to follow an experimental method, which has never been used successfully anywhere in the world. And despite the claims made by Common Core advocates, the Common Core standards are not internationally bench-marked.
• Common Core excludes certain Algebra II and Geometry content that is currently a prerequisite at almost every four-year state college.

The aforementioned facts speak for themselves and require no further elaboration.

Maybe you don't have kids. Maybe you're 30 and your education was more advanced than now. Maybe you went to a really good school.

How many would you have to disagree with, for me to be wrong?

Of course, the next question is easy.

Is this being done by accident or on purpose?

BTW I don't have a degree.

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/classical-education/

 

[Maccer_42]

I've not done much if any research on the Illuminati apart from watch a few "funny" YouTube videos about it so my opinions aren't fact based just speculation, but I think it's perfectly plausible that the Illuminati could still exist to some extent today, maybe not to the extent some YouTube videos will try and pursaude you to believe.

Now I don't think that there is some secret society that meets up in an underground lair and discusses when to start their New Word Order, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that there is a few men (or women) with enough money, power and influence to change things around them for their own gain and do it unnoticed. If people like that do exist I don't think they operate as part of a group, they do so on their own, which is guess wouldn't make them Illuminati technically as they aren't a society but individuals.

With the fact that the NSA and GCHQ and all the other giant spy organizations can exist to monitor the public under the guise of national security and did so for years without being exposed before the Snowden leaks it makes me wonder what else could be going on.

I think all the Illuminati references and occult symbols you see in music videos and movies etc, is just artists or whatever you want to call them buying into the hype, they know if they put in a few triangles and eyes here and there it will get people talking about it, keep them being discussed and relevant which will make them money. They aren't part of some Illuminati group, they aren't trying to brain wash you, they didn't sell their soul to the devil and the certainly aren't reptilian lizard people. They are just trying to cash in.

 

[Famine]

In fact, exclusion of key math concepts is commonplace under Common Core. The Pioneer Institutes examination of Common Core revealed the following deficiencies:

• Common Core fails to teach prime factorization and consequently does not include teaching about least common denominators or greatest common factors.
• Common Core fails to include conversions among fractions, decimals, and percents, identified as a key skill by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Common Core de-emphasizes algebraic manipulation, which is a prerequisite for advanced mathematics, and instead effectively redefines algebra as “functional algebra”, which does not prepare students for STEM careers.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core starts teaching decimals only in grade 4, about two years behind the more rigorous state standards, and fails to use money as a natural introduction to this concept.
• Common Core fails to teach in K-8 about key geometrical concepts such as the area of a triangle, sum of angles in a triangle, isosceles and equilateral triangles, or constructions with a straightedge and compass that good state standards include.

Additionally I found more examples of Common Core taking student achievement backwards through delaying when children which type of math.

• The mathematics standards place Algebra I in ninth grade, rather than in grade 8 where it has traditionally been taught. This fact guarantees that the majority of students will not reach calculus in high school.
• The standards require the teaching of geometry to follow an experimental method, which has never been used successfully anywhere in the world. And despite the claims made by Common Core advocates, the Common Core standards are not internationally bench-marked.
• Common Core excludes certain Algebra II and Geometry content that is currently a prerequisite at almost every four-year state college.

The aforementioned facts speak for themselves and require no further elaboration.

Indeed. Common Core, K-8 schools and school grades don't exist in the UK and NCTM is an US organisation based in Virginia - so those facts are entirely irrelevant to UK members (like you and I) and the UK education system.

 

[Vegard]

@Enemem

- What is your positive intention in this discussion?

- How extensively have you been stuying the subject?

- What are you main sources of information?

 

[Bo]

@Enemem you've just gone off on one about education. Or maybe that's your Illuminati theory.

 

[homeforsummer]

Indeed. Common Core, K-8 schools and school grades don't exist in the UK and NCTM is an US organisation based in Virginia - so those facts are entirely irrelevant to UK members (like you and I) and the UK education system.

That, and it seems odd basing an entire educational argument on solely one aspect of education, that of mathematics.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” (Einstein)

As above, I'm not particularly great mathematically. Partly apathy for the subject, partly my mind doesn't really work that way. It doesn't make me, nor anyone else not great at mathematics, less educated than people 80 (or 102) years ago for not being able to answer the same questions. I know people who are incredibly competent with numbers who can't write for toffee. I have a good friend who was never good at much of anything at school, but has more common sense and wisdom about him than virtually anyone else I've met.

As a very general outlook, I'd say our education is at least as competent as it was a century ago if only because it still has the ability to prepare people for their future jobs. It's also becoming more understanding of those who may not fit into a particular box - being unable to complete a sum no longer gets you a dunce hat or a whip of the cane, which I'd say is generally an improvement.

What is my positive intention for discussing this ?
What is your positive intention ?

I suspect our intentions are actually very similar.

All of us here want others to think more critically about the world around us. The only difference is the way in which we go about it.

Yours is a pessimistic stance - Bad things are probably happening, prove that they aren't
Mine is an optimistic stance - Bad things probably aren't happening, unless proof is provided that they are

Each is a skeptical position, but yours is the position with the burden of proof. The other difference is that I'm quite happy to be proven wrong - the Edward Snowden thing is a good example. We're better off for knowing these things. You give me the impression that you'd rather things were bad though, just to corroborate your own negative outlook on life.

 

[Enemem]

Have you noticed that I have to produce the burden of proof, and you don't. Very convenient for you. My P.I. is to improve the system of education. However that's not easy for me. I don't work in education nor local authority nor a politician. I have no legal power to change the way things are done. Unless I see something obviously illegal.

Why would I want 'things' to be bad ? I have a daughter, I want the best for her. And I'm a human being and I want the best for your kids. Either it's the best that it could be- which I know is false. Or we strive to make it better. That's not going to happen by not challenging the status quo and keeping the overlords in check, or at the very least showing the emperor in his new clothes. I don't want to be proved right, I want things to change. I remember Obama said that, looks like he changed in the wrong direction though.

Preparing people for their future jobs is an interesting way to go. What jobs exactly are they preparing them for? Who decides that ? And how do they know what jobs will be needed? And if they do, then I would suggest this points towards social engineering. What jobs are needed now that needs a different education to 80 years ago (Take away scientific jobs - that's a given)?

The fact that children are not called dunces etc now is a fair point but if it's the best thing we can say about education today, it's a poor do.

Just using one of the 3 R's is not enough. Fair point.

HSV010 - Not gone off on education, but it's difficult to have a discussion when talking about 7 things at once, so kept it simple. That way it's easy to see the answers.

Vegard- 1) see above 2) depends who you compare it to. And why does that matter, I never said I was an expert witness? 3) John Taylor Gatto springs to mind, if you want to listen to someone with a more knowledge regarding the educational system in states. Life in general. I'm not good with names - concepts I'm better with....sorry.

Famine - facts are irrelevant if I live in a different country. Really? Maybe the situation is different over here? I hope so. I know personally three teachers, they are not exactly delighted with the way they need to operate. And these are intelligent vocational teachers.

And I don't want to blame teachers BTW I know that the majority do a difficult job, and they'd probably do it differently if they could.

In fact I'd love to see some evidence that things are getting better. Anyone got any?

 

[Ryanswannell]

Can we PLEASE get back on topic?

 

[Bo]

@Enemem you're taking this thread way off topic.

 

[homeforsummer]

Have you noticed that I have to produce the burden of proof, and you don't. Very convenient for you.

It's nothing to do with being "convenient" for me and everything to do with the nature of debate. Make a claim, provide the evidence. If you can't provide the evidence, don't make the claim.

Since I'm making no claims - just awaiting the evidence - the burden of proof is not on me. It isn't up to me to go looking for the things you claim are happening.

My P.I. is to improve the system of education. However that's not easy for me. I don't work in education nor local authority nor a politician. I have no legal power to change the way things are done. Unless I see something obviously illegal.

You have the power to vote. If you were truly passionate about it, you also have the right to set up your own political party, to gather support for that party and to run for parliament to change the status quo.

Why would I want 'things' to be bad ?

You'd be surprised. A great many people would rather be right about something than be happy.

I have a daughter, I want the best for her. And I'm a human being and I want the best for your kids. Either it's the best that it could be- which I know is false. Or we strive to make it better. That's not going to happen by not challenging the status quo and keeping the overlords in check, or at the very least showing the emperor in his new clothes. I don't want to be proved right, I want things to change. I remember Obama said that, looks like he changed in the wrong direction though.

But what you're doing isn't challenging the status quo. To be frank about it, what you're doing is nothing more than propagating conspiracy theories on a video games forum. You aren't suggesting ways to actually make things better. Unless you're privy to something we aren't - the next Edward Snowden if you will - then you're literally just regurgitating the same tinfoil hat stuff that thousands of others on the internet do.

Preparing people for their future jobs is an interesting way to go. What jobs exactly are they preparing them for? Who decides that ? And how do they know what jobs will be needed? What jobs are needed now that needs a different education to 80 years ago (Take away scientific jobs - that's a given)?

Any jobs. All jobs. The idea of education is to lay the foundation blocks for a lifetime of further learning. That it's changed in 80 years is effectively irrelevant since the world itself has changed vastly in 80 years - probably more so than at any other point in human history.

And you can't realistically say "take away scientific jobs" since that's a bit of a broad term. We live in what many consider to be the "information age" - virtually everything anyone does is influenced in some ways by the technology that has formed around us, from those who work exclusively with the latest quantum technology to your local plumber using Twitter as a means of spreading word about his business.

My job - journalism - has been around for hundreds of years. But the medium through which I do my job didn't exist on a meaningful level 20 years ago (the internet), didn't exist at all sixty years ago (computers) and the subject I write about (cars) only has ~120 years of history. Education has had to change throughout that time since even the oldest of professions have changed throughout time.

 

[Enemem]

Can we PLEASE get back on topic?

What was the topic? Oh yes Illuminati - yay or nay? Yay - generally. Then someone asked me to back it up. So that's what I'm doing. If the Illuminati exist then they must want to do something. Question is what? Sorry if I'm boring you.

Journalism - in the terms of mainstream media is dying a death due to censorship, "don't speak about this , don't mention that, do I have to prove that as well? ".

Just watch different news channels from different countries, to see evidence of what stories are mentioned and which ones never see the light of day in each country.

 

[homeforsummer]

Televised news media is largely entertainment, and in all but a few countries (China, for example) what you see is largely limited to what the networks think will get the most viewers. I'd not say it's influenced by what they think they should be hiding from people.

Written media is a little different. It still retains a streak of investigative journalism within. Often to dubious standards of morality - witness the ongoing phone-hacking scandal. But "censorship" is too strong a word, at least in the UK. The newspapers are fighting tooth and nail for the right to publish what they consider to be in the public interest. That it's being done on a very public stage is a positive sign, since it's the complete opposite of an overnight cover-up or media gag.

Arguably, the mainstream media is being kept on its toes by the emergence of social media, which often breaks stories first. The issue with news on social media is that it frequently steps over lines that regular media is not allowed to tread. The term "contempt of court" means essentially nothing in the wide open spaces of the internet.

 

[Liquid]

Given how terrible the United States government is for keeping secrets, I find it hard to believe that some sort of all powerful secret organistation was pulling the strings without us knowing. Or, if it is real, why would they permit us to discuss them?

Has anyone pointed out yet that the all-seeing providence was printed on United States currency before the symbol became associated with Freemasonry?

Anyway, until evidence, utter tripe in my eyes.

 

[Enemem]

The newspapers are fighting tooth and nail for the right to publish what they consider to be in the public interest. That it's being done on a very public stage is a positive sign, since it's the complete opposite of an overnight cover-up or media gag.

Who are the newspapers fighting against? And why are they fighting against the newspapers? They're the people I'm talking about.

Has anyone pointed out yet that the all-seeing providence was printed on United States currency before the symbol became associated with Freemasonry?

Anyway, until evidence, utter tripe in my eyes.

Why do you bring this up? Soon you'll be arguing against yourself and telling us that I mentioned Freemasonry.

BTW Points against my thoughts on common core - could have included Utah, Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas and numerous others have pulled out of this common core. Puff!!!

 

[homeforsummer]

Who are the newspapers fighting against? And why are they fighting against the newspapers? They're the people I'm talking about.

The government, and because there've been a series of high-profile morally-dubious investigations. Specifically in this scenario, several newspapers have got into hot water for spying on members of the public, celebrities etc. The government wants to make the extent of this process illegal*, and the press is fighting back because, spying aside, some of the restrictions would overly restrict the freedom of the press so highly valued in this country.

At least that's how it is on the surface. I know you're interested in digging deeper than that but sometimes it's as simple as what you see. A minority within the press has been naughty, government reprimands them but oversteps their reach, press fights back.



*If I was being flippant, this is where I'd say "spying on the public is THEIR job!", but I doubt that would help the discussion...

 

[Enemem]

Sometimes it's as simple as what you see. True. But how would you know if it wasn't? Ask questions and seek evidence for wider issues. And that's what I do. I don't mind if I'm wrong, in fact, it delights me. If I'm right then I want it to be seen that I am, so others are able to see. Is it my fault if the world appears to be run by idiots. What's more likely, they haven't got a clue or they do it on purpose?

 

[homeforsummer]

But who are you classing as the conspirators in this situation? The invasive press, or the restrictive government? Or perhaps both? Are they working with each other to nefarious ends, or against each other for their individual ends?

Or is it just an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object?

 

[Enemem]

But who are you classing as the conspirators in this situation? The invasive press, or the restrictive government? Or perhaps both? Are they working with each other to nefarious ends, or against each other for their individual ends?

Or is it just an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object?

Who has the power? The governments. And I wish the press were more invasive, not the government. Which direction is it going in? I see plenty of stories from alternative press that never makes it to MSM, which indicate innappropriate levels of government interference. I suspect that the MSM know more than they are permitted to say by their owners. Unless the MSM get more teeth, they're dead. No-one will watch or read them anymore. And alternatives will take over.

 

[Famine]

Famine - facts are irrelevant if I live in a different country. Really? Maybe the situation is different over here?

Yes - we don't have Common Core. Bringing it up in a discussion with two other UK members about their education history doesn't make any sense.

What we do have is "the National Curriculum", which is a government-set standard for basic education in each of the core subjects up to Key Stage 3 and the SATS exams and, more recently, KS4 and GCSEs. It's largely the same principle, but generally the National Curriculum being taught right now was set five or more years ago.

I hope so. I know personally three teachers, they are not exactly delighted with the way they need to operate. And these are intelligent vocational teachers.

I've worked in three different schools in the UK, in different parts of the country, at different levels of education and serving completely different demographics. It depends on the teacher and the environment.

I see plenty of stories from alternative press that never makes it to MSM, which indicate innappropriate levels of government interference. I suspect that the MSM know more than they are permitted to say by their owners.

The Guardian seemed to do just fine with Snowden.


For the most part, "alternative press" is a byword for "evidence-free opinion".

 

[Enemem]

For the most part, "alternative press" is a byword for "evidence-free opinion".

Where did you drag that up from? Same place as "mainstream media" is a "mouthpiece for the government"?

What's different about the Guardian MSM news organisations to others?

Do you know if we have something similar to the common-core? If you don't then maybe we should do some more research before we continue with education?

 

[BobK]

Do you know if we have something similar to the common-core? If you don't then maybe we should do some more research before we continue with education?

Perhaps you missed this part of his post:

Yes - we don't have Common Core. Bringing it up in a discussion with two other UK members about their education history doesn't make any sense.

What we do have is "the National Curriculum", which is a government-set standard for basic education in each of the core subjects up to Key Stage 3 and the SATS exams and, more recently, KS4 and GCSEs. It's largely the same principle, but generally the National Curriculum being taught right now was set five or more years ago.I've worked in three different schools in the UK, in different parts of the country, at different levels of education and serving completely different demographics. It depends on the teacher and the environment.The Guardian seemed to do just fine with Snowden.

 

[homeforsummer]

Where did you drag that up from? Same place as "mainstream media" is a "mouthpiece for the government"?

I'm not sure what your issue is with the part of @Famine's post you quoted.

The internet has allowed pretty much anyone with a blog and a keyboard to consider themselves a "journalist" these days. Hell, for the first year to year and a half of doing my job I felt very uneasy using the term to describe what I did because it felt fake - I was just a guy with a keyboard writing about things that were happening. Only as I started getting invited to cover events, digging into stories in the mainstream media, covering stories from a perspective that others might not have explored, that it felt more genuine.

Many don't think that way though. Ranting on a blog about say, conspiracy theories, isn't journalism unless there's a layer of research and investigation there to back it up. It is, as mentioned above, evidence-free opinion.

To draw a parallel, it's a little like certain people on GTP decreeing that a particular car is rubbish without having driven it, sat in it, seen one on the road or even bothering to read up any facts on it. You wouldn't take advice on buying a car from such a person, and equally you need to be very careful what you read in the alternative press because often there's a similar level of knowledge behind it - i.e. very little.

Doesn't go for all alternative press of course. Some are widely trusted. But the keyboard warriors do skew the balance a bit.

 

[r0llinlacs]

The amount of bashing in this thread is laughable. Laughable to me because those naysayers are the ones who are so adamantly close minded about any conspiracy theory and also funny because they think that just by calling you a conspiracy theorist and posting a picture with tinfoil hat somehow makes them a better person than you, somehow discredits you and somehow, without any type of factual evidence or even opinionated debate, they are right.

The simple fact that the CIA invented the word conspiracy theory to discredit and silence political dissent speaks for itself. (Oh so coincidentally 4 years after JFK was assassinated for his speech.) I'd say it worked well.

All I've got to say is, trust no one and question everything. Doing anything other than that is just ignorant.

Google CIA invented conspiracy theory
4,850,000 results, pick whatever source you want.

"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance"
-Albert Einstein

^That speaks for about 90% of the posts on this thread.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

• Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
• Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.

I am a little late to the party, but I thought I might jump in here and point out that most of this data is going to be derived from the PISA rankings, which classify nations in terms of academic performance in key subject areas, and it is very, very easy to skew PISA rankings to fit an agenda. For instance, China is ranked first, but the only data available to PISA comes from a selected cross-section of schools in Shanghai. Similarly, it takes into account historical results so that nations do not shoot up the PISA rankings and then fall back down because they had one good year. Any dramatic changes are usually the result of a change in curriculum, but it tends to even itself out in the long run.

Finally, modern educational theory tends to move towards assessment of learning. Until recently, schools and teachers employed the assessment for learning method, whereby exams and assessment tasks were used to make sure students covered all of their content. Assessment of learning instead uses assessments to see how well students have learned something, and provide information to teachers on the areas a student needs to work on. However, assessment for learning is quantitative, and easier to summarise in facts and figures than assessment of learning, which is qualitative, and so is often used in statistics.

Also, it depends on which classical educational model you subscribe to. This Common Core curriculum - we do not have it here - falls in line with the works of Piaget, which tends to work on the idea that students can be directed towards content. I (and most teachers I know) subscribe to the model put forward by Vygotsky, where content can be directed towards students.

 

[Enemem]

Tell you what. Here's the thing about 'official line theorists', let's take the death of Osama Bin Ladin.

The conspiracy theorist says , he dies just after 9/11 with kidney failure.

The official line theorist - He was shot by Navy Seals.

Okay, this is how the argument goes. Prove he died of kidney failure? You can't prove it then it can't be true, I don't have to prove mine, because it's official. Wrong. The onus is on the official line theorists to provide evidence as well, but they don't, because they know, in the back of their minds, that they're wrong, and that they can't prove their version of events. If the official line people were honest to themselves, and put their own theories to the same critical thinking that they put into denying conspiracy theories, then we might get somewhere.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Also, it depends on which classical educational model you subscribe to. This Common Core curriculum - we do not have it here - falls in line with the works of Piaget, which tends to work on the idea that students can be directed towards content. I (and most teachers I know) subscribe to the model put forward by Vygotsky, where content can be directed towards students.

Vygotsky here too... Piaget's beret put me off the day I collected the book. My mentor was pro-Piaget but becoming an anachronism by then. I'm glad I'm no longer teaching but they were (mostly) happy days

 

[Boone]

Tell you what. Here's the thing about 'official line theorists', let's take the death of Osama Bin Ladin.

The conspiracy theorist says , he dies just after 9/11 with kidney failure.

The official line theorist - He was shot by Navy Seals.

Okay, this is how the argument goes. Prove he died of kidney failure? You can't prove it then it can't be true, I don't have to prove mine, because it's official. Wrong. The onus is on the official line theorists to provide evidence as well, but they don't, because they know, in the back of their minds, that they're wrong, and that they can't prove their version of events. If the official line people were honest to themselves, and put their own theories to the same critical thinking that they put into denying conspiracy theories, then we might get somewhere.

Have you ever read the book "Kill Bin Laden" by the former 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta commander on the ground at the time in Tora Bora(written under the pseudonym Dalton Fury)?

 

[DrPuppetwarrior]

Can someone explain to me who illuminati and Freemason and all that in a nutshell? I never heard of this and I want to know what is the big fuss
Thanks