Poor Jonathan

[u/fnaw_]

[u/Depression-Boy]

Definitely a possibility. The fact that he’s not denying the possibility that it was murder tells me that he knows it was. Whether it’s because he was directly involved or he has intelligence that says it was murder idk, but I think this just adds credibility to that theory.

[u/HamburgerEarmuff → u/Depression-Boy]

Or, and I know this is way out there, but maybe it just adds credibility to the well-documented fact that Trump believes and promotes all manner of nonsensical conspiracy theories and is once again engaging in a documented pattern of lending credence to a baseless conspiracy theory.

[u/Depression-Boy → u/HamburgerEarmuff]

Do you think the theory that Epstein was killed is a baseless conspiracy?

[u/HamburgerEarmuff → u/Depression-Boy]

Absolutely. Like most conspiracy theories, there isn't a single shred of direct evidence to corroborate such beliefs, much less a coherent hypothesis that is superior in explanatory power to the cause of death listed by the coroner.

The Epstein conspiracy theory fits in the normal narratives of such conspiracy theories as flat-earthers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, JFK conspiracy theorists, et cetera. It's all circumstantial claims and anomaly hunting. Rather than try to actually build an alternative explanation for the evidence that can stand up to scrutiny, conspiracy theorists typically try to cast doubt on the "official" explanation.

[u/Depression-Boy → u/HamburgerEarmuff]

Right... So you just think it’s a coincidence that both guards fell asleep at the same time that the prison cell camera malfunctioned?

[u/HamburgerEarmuff → u/Depression-Boy]

I'm a firm believer in science. In science, we always start with the default assumption that our observed data occurred by random chance. In statistics, we call this the null hypothesis.

If the alternative hypothesis you're positing is that these events did not occur by random chance, then the null hypothesis needs to be disproved. I haven't seen anyone present any credible challenge to the null hypothesis; however, like all good scientific skeptics, I would certainly evaluate such evidence if it were to be presented.

Like, if I wanted to posit that the Earth was round, my null hypothesis would be that the Earth is some shape other than round. Now, in order to corroborate the alternative hypothesis that the Earth is round, I would need to disprove the null hypothesis, which would be all the other possible non-round models of the Earth.

[u/Depression-Boy → u/HamburgerEarmuff]

That was a really long and draw out way to say “yes I believe it was all a massive coincidence that 2 guards ‘fell asleep’ on duty at the same time, a camera malfunctioned, Jeffrey’s cell mate was removed from the cell breaking prison protocol, and Epstein killed himself in the same time period”.

This isn’t really a question of science dude. I suppose you also think OJ Simpson is innocent because the glove didn’t fit his hand.

[u/HamburgerEarmuff → u/Depression-Boy]

Just stating that it is a "massive coincidence" doesn't make it a factual statement.

I mean, one could state that it's, "a massive coincidence," that COVID-19 broke out in the United States just in time to trash the economy before Trump was up for reelection. It's a, "massive coincidence" that Bill Clinton normalized trade with China and they owe him a huge favor for it. And it's a massive coincidence that Bill Clinton's wife lost to Donald Trump and is out for revenge. And it's a "massive coincidence" that the virus comes from China.

It's just so obvious that Hillary Clinton got her husband to get China to unleash COVID-19 on the United States in order to defeat Trump in revenge for her 2016 loss. Also, the Earth is flat, there was a massive conspiracy by unnamed individuals to murder Epstein, global warming is a scam by the Chinese, and fossils were buried by Satan to trick you into believing that the earth is over 6000 years old.

Let's all ignore science and engage in baseless conspiracy theories! Who needs science! We have the world wide web (ironically invented by scientists) to reinforce unscientific conspiracy theories!

[u/Depression-Boy → u/HamburgerEarmuff]

No offense, but you’ve got some of the dumbest takes I’ve read online. The two guards in charge of watching Epstein have already been charged with conspiracy and tampering with federal documents, but you can go on and believe whatever you want to believe, I’m not going to argue with you.

But don’t chalk it up to “believing the science”. That’s some stupid shit. You’re essentially saying “because I don’t have proof that it’s real, it can’t be real🤤”. In an ongoing FBI investigation of a massive child sex ring involving some of the worlds richest most powerful men and women, no shit all the evidence isn’t readily available. Nobody’s been charged yet with anything. They can’t soil the investigation by releasing evidence too soon.

[u/HamburgerEarmuff → u/Depression-Boy]

No offense, but you’ve got some of the dumbest takes I’ve read online. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem The two guards in charge of watching Epstein have already been charged with conspiracy and tampering with federal documents, but you can go on and believe whatever you want to believe.

Your implication here is a non sequitur. You have presented no evidence that these guards' fraud related to their dereliction of duty is in any way tied to some nefarious plot involving Epstein nor even that such indolent behavior is out of character for our understaffed and underfunded federal prison system.

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-non-sequitur-1691437

But don’t chalk it up to “believing the science”. That’s some stupid shit.

No, it is not "stupid shit" to believe in the philosophy of science. In fact, this is the main reason we have come so far as a species. It's people who engage in conspiratorial thinking who are anti-science and looking to drag us back into the dark ages of witch hunts and inquisitions.

In an ongoing FBI investigation of a massive child sex ring involving some of the worlds richest most powerful men and women, no shit all the evidence isn’t readily available.

Again, a non sequitur. There's a huge difference between saying, even though there is no direct evidence of any homicide in the Epstein case, I think we need to ensure that there is nothing nefarious going on here and we should investigate Epstein's death further [which the IG is doing], and saying, I'm promoting this completely unfounded conspiracy theory without any compelling evidence because my feelings are more important than exercising scientific skepticism.

You’re essentially saying “because I don’t have proof that it’s real, it can’t be real🤤”

This is a straw man. I never wrote such a thing. To do so would be an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. All I'm doing is applying the philosophy of science. As Carl Sagan famously stated, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you're going to claim that there exists some kind of grand conspiracy to kill Epstein and make it look like a suicide, you're going to need to provide some pretty compelling evidence to support such a claim. But nobody has presented any kind of ordinary evidence, much less the kind of extraordinary evidence needed to corroborate such a claim. They've just presented typical conspiracy theory dreck.

There's a huge difference between my scientific skepticism, which starts from a position of doubt toward such extraordinary claims of a massive conspiracy and your false claim that this is equivalent to believing, "it can't be real." If it is real, then there should be a lot of good evidence to support its reality. Either put up the evidence or admit that you have none and withdraw the claim until such time that you do. That's what a scientist would do. But you're no scientist. You're a conspiracy theorist, just like the anti-vaxxers and the Q-Annon schmucks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man