Aamused in Austin, TX

I participate in another community on a near-daily basis and there has been a rather interesting item to spring in there which asks the question 'did a plane REALLY hit the pentagon building?' 'Was it a target that the plane willingly crashed into?' 'Was the plane shot down and that's where it landed?'

Valid questions really...especially if you do not except the government version of the events of 9/11. I think few of us accept the 'official' version 100%. We're mostly too cynical and jaded to do so.

The thread has gone from those questions to various links to 'proof' that no plane crashed etc. And I'm sure you can imagine the discussion has ranged all over the map with opinions expressed--some as opinion and some by those convinced their opinion is fact, because their belief in their opinion is so strong.

One member maintains that Conspiracy Theory serves an important purpose in our lives. I'm not sure I agree with that, but then I got to thinking why do I not agree with that?

I made the following post:

I guess I have a long standing puzzlement about what purpose conspiracy theories serve.

God knows conspiracy theories are nothing new. Usually I have no problem with any method of thinking that leads us to ask hard questions...questions unasked before, or questions left unanswered.

My problem may be less with those who author conspiracy theories than with those who swallow them as in-stone, unalterable fact. They don't stop to think.

When I'm confronted with a conspiracy, or any factoid trumpeted as news and 'hidden truth', I look at it and I look at the mainstream news and I do my own digging around in order to add and discard items of information that are fact or fancy. I guess I stop and think. That's what I was taught to do. Most of us who grew up in the generation of Vietnam were. Trust none of what you read and only some of what you hear. Rely on your own experience and judgment to reveal the truth.

Just because I do not believe that a certain story published as the official 'word' from a government or other authoritative body is unadulterated truth, I do not automatically believe an 'alternate 180 degree declaration' by any organization or counter-culture entity to be THE unadulterated truth simply because it is opposite of the status-quo's version.

Too many people I know and read do exactly that. And that is a gullibility factor of my fellow man that I am very, VERY uneasy with.

Just the other day in my journal, for no particular reason, I posted a quote I'd stumbled across from H. L. Mencken which says:

The world always makes the assumption that the exposure of an error is identical with the discovery of truth - that the error and truth are simply opposite. They are nothing of the sort. What the world turns to, when it is cured on one error, is usually simply another error, and maybe one worse than the first one.

To accept establishment crap as truth is dangerous
To accept the anti-establishment crap as truth is equally dangerous.

Two wrongs do not make an incontrovertible right.

And wanted to encourage some discussion here, some input from you folks...as well, since I know many of you and have a great deal of respect for your thought and opinion. (And the fact that you don't beat me to death with personal opinion or get offended when I do not accept your opinion as my fact.)

:)