Anecdotal evidence? I thought we were supposed to reject that.
> private news networks
You mean rebranded affiliates? https://youtu.be/rknON89H35o?t=35
> the governments of other countries
Are governments inherently trustworthy?
I can do this all day. There is no end to fallacies of thought.
News networks, twitter and podcasts got 100x better at making mountains out of mole-hills because they had continuous access to an audience to fine-tune their reaction engines. That's it.
Not when it's thousands of people showing us photos and videos.
It's not that it's impossible that [insert major event here] is a conspiracy, but you always have to ask:
- is it possible for even a highly competent government to orchestrate this conspiracy with no whistleblowers?
- what is the benefit of the conspiracy to the conspirators?
- is the benefit of the conspiracy worth the effort?
In the case of "faking a hurricane," there is no incentive (and in fact there are disincentives to being wrong about it for the meteorologists) and there is no possibly way to orchestrate that large of a conspiracy.
If the CCP is unable to successfully disappear people or put Uyghurs in camps without people finding out about it, nothing this large could be pulled off in the US.
> You mean rebranded affiliates?
No, I mean the Weather Channel and others.
> I can do this all day. There is no end to fallacies of thought.
I don't think you're doing what you think you're doing.