You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

heks_ ago

Perhaps. Or perhaps they were just joking because it was an empty metal room at the time the pic was taken and shows like Dexter and Criminal Minds are part of the public consciousness. Did the person who made the comment even work at the restaurant or is there any reason to think they might be involved in this whole affair apart from that specific comment? I can't recall. I mean you could be totally right, but given the nature of this thing and the potential for totally justified outrage if it's true, I think we need to be very careful about confirmation bias. The mere fact that some picture or comment can be interpreted in a way that is consistent with this pedophile ring idea doesn't mean that it really should be interpreted that way. It's very easy to start interpreting anything and everything as supporting something we already believe to be true, so the more we believe it to be true the more judicious and skeptical we should try to be in deciding what truly counts as legitimate evidence. I would say that a good rule of thumb is to ask if some other mundane explanation for a given fact is plausible. If it is, it's in the best interests of this community to accept the mundane explanation and set the fact aside until/unless some other fact(s) cause us to reevaluate the plausibility of that explanation. This will keep people focused on the strongest evidence and show anyone following along that the community of researchers are not quick to accept as evidence just anything and everything they can possibly find that can even remotely be made consistent with the theory.

For example, even with the Besta Pizza logo being essentially identical to the Boy Lovers logo shown by the FBI, if that fact stood all on it's own, the most plausible explanation would be that it was an unfortunate accident. But that explanation becomes MUCH less plausible when a number of other establishments in close proximity all seem to have other pedophile logos and when some or all of them can be connected in some way to Clinton and Podesta given the content of Podesta's emails.

Likewise, when the first plane crashed into the World Trade Center, the most plausible explanation was that some horrific accident had taken place. When the second one hit that explanation ceased to be plausible.

It is conceivable that some future fact will come to light that makes that metal room and the associated comment seem like a legitimate piece of evidence, but as it stands right now, at least from everything I've seen, it's a distraction and best set aside for the time being.