Internet Surfer 2.0/Internet Surfer 2.0 (Wayzata Technology) (1996).iso/pc/text/mac/faqs.099

Text File | 1996-02-12 | 27.9 KB | 688 lines

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS);faqs.099



  However, the past several years have witnessed a dramatic increase
in the number of sites choosing to register host names in the Internet
Domain Name Service (DNS) hierarchy, in addition to getting a host
entry added to the UUCP maps.  The DNS hierarchy is becomingly
increasingly standardized, and DNS name service is more reliable than
the UUCP maps.  Therefore, if register a DNS name for your site, put
that DNS name in your UUCP map entry as an alias for your site, and
use the DNS address rather than the UUCP host name in your mail and
USENET postings, both UUCP hosts and hosts that do DNS will be able to
get mail to you more efficiently and reliably.

  There are two types of DNS host records that are relevant here.  If
you have opted to contract with a company for a direct connection to
the Internet, then you are probably going to want to register an
address record advertising what your address will be on the Internet.
Hosts which understand DNS can then use that record to connect
directly to your machine and deliver mail to it.

  If, on the other hand, you are going to be getting your mail via
UUCP from some other site, then the host record you will be
registering is a Mail eXchange (MX) record.  This record announces to
the world that mail destined to your host can be directed instead to
another host that IS directly on the Internet.  That host is your "MX
forwarder," and it must be one of your feed sites that knows how to
deliver mail to you.  In fact, you can have multiple MX records if you
have multiple feeds on the Internet and want it to be possible for
mail to be routed through all of them (for increased reliability), if
they are willing.  Note that if you use a commercial service provider
for your mail feed, it will probably also be your MX forwarder.

  Even if none of your feeds are on the Internet, you may be able to
get an MX record, by finding an Internet site that is willing to
receive your mail and put it on its way through the correct UUCP
route.  There are currently at least a couple of sites willing to
perform this service for no charge, in order to encourage the
increased use of DNS records.  You can therefore probably locate an MX
forwarder by posting to news.admin and asking if anyone is willing to
forward for you.

  The procedure for registering a DNS record is quite simple and
usually takes a month or less (at the time of this writing, the
Network Information Center is in a transition period so you'll need to
have patience).  Note that many commercial network providers, such as
UUNET, will take care of this for you.

  Whether you decide to register an address record or an MX record,
you need to decide what your DNS host name is going to be.  Since the
DNS is arranged in a hierarchy, you need to decide what hierarchy your
name will appear in.  For example, you might choose to be in the ".us"
domain if you are in the United States and want to be in the United
States geographical hierarchy.  Alternatively, you might choose ".edu"
for a University, ".org" for a non-profit organization, ".com" for a
commercial company, etc.  For more information about the various
hierarchies and about choosing a host name, see the "How to Get
Information about Networks" posting already referenced.

  If you are not in the US, you're theoretically supposed to have no
choice about the top-level domain -- it should always be the
two-letter ISO code for your country (".fr", ".de", etc.).  However,
depending on how and how well you are connected to the network, you
might be able to get away with being in one of the older domains
mentioned above (".edu", ".org", etc.).  If you want to find out how
to get a host name in a particular European domain, you can probably
start by sending mail to [e-mail] and asking for more
information.

  Once you have determined your host name, you need to determine one
or more hosts (preferably two or three, so that even if one is having
trouble, the others will fill in for it) that will act as your "name
servers," advertising your host name to anyone who asks for it.  Note
that many hierarchies have their own name servers, which means that
when you go through the process of figuring out which domain your host
name will be in, you may find some name servers available to you
already.  Furthermore, if you opt to go with a commercial service
provider as described above, your service provider will probably be
willing to act as a name server.  Different domain-administration
organizations may require fewer or more name servers (e.g. the NIC
(mentioned below) requires at least two).

  Once you've got your host name picked out, you need to submit an
application to the authorities for the domain you've chosen.  Many of
the domains, for example, are managed by the DDN Network Information
Center -- to submit an application to one of those domains, you would
get the file DOMAIN-TEMPLATE.TXT via anonymous ftp from nic.ddn.mil,
fill it out, and mail it to [e-mail].  You will probably
determine the correct method for applying for a host name in your
domain during the course of investigating which domain to put your
host name in.

  If you submit an application and don't get any acknowlegement or
response in a couple of weeks, it's a good idea to send another note
to the same address as you sent your original application to, asking
if it was received.

  Even if you aren't going to be connecting directly to Internet at
the start, if your site is using any TCP/IP-based equipment, you
should request a block of IP addresses, to save future transition
headaches.  Request one Class C address per subnet, or a Class B if
your site has more than a few hundred systems.  If you don't
understand any of this and don't intend on getting on the Internet,
don't worry about it.  If/when you do decide to get onto the Internet,
your service provider should be prepared to help you understand what
needs to be done.

  Once your application has been approved and your name entered into
your name servers' databases, update the mail software on your system
and on your MX forwarder's system to recognize and use the new domain.

  [A final note: Much of the information in this section about the DNS
system is sketchy.  It is intentionally so, since all of this
information is available from a number of different sources, and they
cover it much better than I can here.  If you are interested in
finding out more about how the DNS works, you are strongly urged yet
again to read the "How to Get Information About Networks" posting and
to follow up on the sources of documentation that it references.]

              *************************

  In addition to the resources already mentioned, there are several
books which discuss USENET and/or UUCP maintenance.  They include
(these entries are culled from the "YABL" posting, by Mitch Wright
<[e-mail]>, in comp.unix.questions):

TITLE: Managing UUCP and USENET
AUTHOR: O'Reilly, Tim
AUTHOR: Todino, Grace
SUBJECT: Introduction
PUBLISHER: O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
DATE: 1990
PAGES: 289
ISBN: 0-937175-48-X
APPROX_COST: 24.95
KEYWORDS: Nutshell Handbook
SUGGESTED_BY: Mitch Wright <[e-mail]>
SUPPLIERS
    E-mail: ... uunet!ora!nuts
    Phone#: [phone]-NUTS

TITLE: Unix Communications
AUTHOR: Anderson, Bart
AUTHOR: Costales, Barry
AUTHOR: Henderson, Harry
SUBJECT: Communication Reference
PUBLISHER: The Waite Group
DATE: 1991
PAGES: 736
ISBN: 0-672-22773-8
APPROX_COST: 29.95
KEYWORDS: UUCP, USENET
COMMENTS
    Covers everything the end user needs to know about email, USENET
    and UUCP.

TITLE: Using UUCP and USENET
AUTHOR: Todino, Grace
AUTHOR: Dougherty, Dale
SUBJECT: Introduction
PUBLISHER: O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
DATE: 1990
PAGES: 210
ISBN: 0-937175-10-2
APPROX_COST: 21.95
KEYWORDS: Nutshell Handbook
SUGGESTED_BY: Mitch Wright <[e-mail]>
SUPPLIERS
    E-mail: ... uunet!ora!nuts
    Phone#: [phone]-NUTS

If you are going to be setting up a UUCP/modem USENET site, you will
probably find these books quite useful, especially if the UUCP
documentation that comes with the OS you're running is sparse.

              *************************

  Comments about, suggestions about or corrections to this posting are
welcomed.  If you would like to ask me to change this posting in some
way, the method I appreciate most is for you to actually make the
desired modifications to a copy of the posting, and then to send me
the modified posting, or a context diff between my posted version and
your modified version (if you do the latter, make sure to include in
your mail the "Version:" line from my posted version).  Submitting
changes in this way makes dealing with them easier for me and helps to
avoid misunderstandings about what you are suggesting.

  Rich Braun <[e-mail]> provided most of the information above
about registering DNS records, and provided other useful comments and
suggestions.  [e-mail] provided some very useful rewriting as
well as some different perspectives that helped to make the article
more general, as well as providing some specific information about
working in Europe, as well as providing other useful comments.

  The following people provided useful comments and suggestions about
this article:

  Vikas Aggarwal <[e-mail]>
  Anton J. Aylward <[e-mail]>
  Bruno Blissenbach <[e-mail]>
  Oliver Boehmer <[e-mail]>
  Andy Brager <[e-mail]>
  Michael Bryan <[e-mail]>
  Alan Cox <[e-mail]>
  John Curran <[e-mail]>
  Chris Davies <[e-mail]>
  Christopher Davis <[e-mail]>
  Nathan F. Estey <[e-mail]>
  Stuart Freedman <[e-mail]>
  Margaret D. Gibbs <[e-mail]>
  Dan Horner <[e-mail]>
  Brad Isley <[e-mail]>
  J. Lee Japp <[e-mail]>
  [e-mail]
  Norman Lin <[e-mail]>
  [e-mail]
  Mark E. Mallett <[e-mail]>
  Owen Scott Medd <[e-mail]>
  Bertrand Meyer <[e-mail]>
  Pushpendra Mohta <[e-mail]>
  Mark Moraes <[e-mail]>
  Andrew Partan <[e-mail]>
  Brad Passwaters <[e-mail]>
  Michel Pollet <[e-mail]>
  Bob Rieger <[e-mail]>
  Rich Salz <[e-mail]>
  Martin Lee Schoffstall <[e-mail]>
  Russell Schulz <[e-mail]>
  Doug Sewell <[e-mail]>
  Barry Shein <[e-mail]>
  Vince Skahan <[e-mail]>
  Shih-ping Spencer Sun <[e-mail]>
  Jerry Sweet <[e-mail]>
  David W. Tamkin <[e-mail]>
  Christophe Wolfhugel <[e-mail]>
  Steve Yelvington <[e-mail]>

--
Jonathan Kamens                                         [e-mail]
MIT Information Systems/Athena              Moderator, news.answers
Xref: bloom-picayune.mit.edu sci.skeptic:82615 news.answers:4650
Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!enterpoop.mit.edu!eru.mt.luth.se!lunic!sunic!mcsun!uknet!root44!hrc63!mrcu!uk.co.gec-mrc!paj
From: [e-mail]-mrc (Paul Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,news.answers
Subject: sci.skeptic: The Frequently Questioned Answers
Summary: This posting contains a list of Frequently Asked Questions
    about scientific skepticism and various fringe topics.  It
    should be read by anyone who wishes to post to sci.skeptic.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:10:41 GMT
Expires: 27 Jan 93 15:05:24 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]-mrc
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: GEC-Marconi Research Centre, Great Baddow, Essex
Lines: 2158
Approved: [e-mail] (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Supersedes: <[e-mail]>

Archive-name: skeptic-faq
Last-modified: 92/12/16
Version: @(#)skeptic-faq.text    1.5

          The Frequently Questioned Answers
          =================================

Introduction
============

This is the sci.skeptic FAQ.  It is intended to provide a factual base
for most of the commonly discussed topics on sci.skeptic.
Unfortunately I don't have much time to do this in, and anyway a FAQ
should be the Distilled Wisdom of the Net rather than just My Arrogant
Opinion, so I invite submissions and let all the net experts out there
fill in the details.  Submissions from any point of view and on any
sci.skeptic topic are welcomed, but please keep them short and to the
point.  The ideal submission is a short summary with one or two
references to other literature.  I have added comments in square
brackets where I think more information is particularly needed, but
don't let that stop you sending something else.

In general it is not very useful to criticise areas of the FAQ as "not
explaining it properly".  If you want to see something changed then
please write a submission which explains it better.  Grammar and
spelling corrections are always welcome though.

If you are reading this with a newsreader and want to follow up on
something, please copy the question to the subject line.  This is more
informative than a reference to the entire FAQ.

Please mail submissions and comments to <[e-mail]>.  If that
bounces, try <[e-mail]>, which explicitly routes
your email via the UK backbone.

This is in no way an "official" FAQ.  I am a computer scientist by
profession and deeply skeptical of paranormal claims (although I may
include some pro-paranormal arguments here).  If anyone else with a
less skeptical point of view wants to start a FAQ list, please feel
free.  I certainly can't stop you.

Disclaimer: The opinions in this article are not necessarily those of
        GEC.

Other Topics
============

I would like to have some info on Astrology, Velikovsky and the
Tunguska (sp?) event.  Submissions on these matters are invited.

Credits
=======

Thanks to all the people who have sent me submissions and comments.
There isn't enough room to thank everyone, but some of the more major
contributors are listed here:

York H. Dobyns <[e-mail]> provided carbon 14
dating information, notes about current psi researchers and other
useful comments.

Dendrochronology information came from <[e-mail]>.

The questions "What are UFOs?" and "Are crop circles made by flying
saucers?" were answered by Chris Rutkowski <[e-mail]>

Ken Shirriff <[e-mail]> provided information on
perpetual motion machines, Leidenfrost reference and the AIDS section.

Robert Sheaffer <[e-mail]> sent information about Philip
Klass and UFO abductions.

The Ezekiel information comes from a posting by John Baskette
<[e-mail]>.

Contents
========

A `*' indicates a new or rewritten entry.  A `+' indicates an altered
entry.

Background
----------
0.1: What is sci.skeptic for?
0.2: What is sci.skeptic not for?
0.3: What is CSICOP?  Whats their address? +
0.4: What is "Prometheus"?
0.5: Who are some prominent skeptics? +
0.6: Aren't all skeptics just closed-minded bigots?
0.7: Aren't all paranormalists just woolly-minded fools?
0.8: What is a "conspiracy theory"?

The Scientific Method
---------------------

1.1: What is the scientific method?
1.2: What is the difference between a fact, a theory and a hypothesis?
1.3: Can science ever really prove anything?
1.4: If scientific theories keep changing, where is the Truth?
1.5: What evidence is needed for an extraordinary claim?
1.6: What is Occam's Razor?
1.7: Galileo was persecuted, just like researchers into <X> today.
1.8: What is the "Experimenter effect".
1.9: How much fraud is there in science? *
1.9.1: Did Mendel fudge his results? *

Psychic Powers
--------------

2.1: Is Uri Geller for real? *
2.2: I have had a psychic experience. +
2.3: What is "sensory leakage"?
2.4: Who are the main psi researchers? +
2.5: Does dowsing work? +
2.6: Could psi be inhibited by the presence of skeptics?

UFOs/Flying Saucers
-------------------
3.1  What are UFOs?
3.1.1: Are UFOs alien spacecraft?
3.1.2: Are UFOs natural phenomena?
3.1.3: But isn't it possible that aliens are visiting Earth?
3.2: Is it true that the US government has a crashed flying saucer?
     (MJ-12)? +
3.3: What is "channeling"?
3.4: How can we test a channeller?
3.5: I am in telepathic contact with the aliens.
3.6: Some bozo has just posted a load of "teachings" from a UFO.  What
     should I do?
3.7: Are crop circles made by flying saucers?
3.7.1: Are crop circles made by "vortices"?
3.7.2: Are crop circles made by hoaxers?
3.7.3: Are crop circles radioactive?
3.7.4: What about cellular changes in plants within crop circles?
3.8: Have people been abducted by UFOs?
3.9: What is causing the strange cattle deaths? *
3.10: What is the face on Mars?
3.11: Did Ezekiel See a Flying Saucer?

Faith Healing and Alternative Therapies
---------------------------------------

4.1: Isn't western medicine reductionistic and alternatives holistic? +
4.2: What is a double-blind trial?  What is a placebo?
4.3: Why should scientific criteria apply to alternative therapies?
4.4: What is homeopathy? +
4.5: What is aroma therapy?
4.6: What is reflexology? +
4.7: Does acupuncture work?
4.8: What about psychic surgery?
4.9: What is Crystal Healing?
4.10: Does religious healing work? +
4.11: What harm does it do anyway?

Creation versus Evolution
-------------------------

5.1: Is the Bible evidence of anything? +
5.2: Could the Universe have been created old?
5.3: What about Carbon-14 dating?
5.4: What is "dendrochronology"?
5.5: What is evolution?  Where do I find out more?
5.6: The second law of thermodynamics says....
5.7: How could living organisms arise "by chance"?
5.8: But doesn't the human body seem to be well designed?
5.9: What about the thousands of scientists who have become Creationists?

Fire-walking
-----------

6.1: Is fire-walking possible?
6.2: Can science explain fire-walking?

New Age
-------

7.1: What do New Agers believe?
7.2: What is the Gaia hypothesis?
7.3: Was Nostradamus a prophet?
7.4: Does astrology work? *
7.4.1: Could astrology work by gravity? *
7.4.2: What is the `Mars Effect'? *

Strange Machines: Free Energy and Anti-Gravity
----------------------------------------------

8.1: Why don't electrical perpetul motion machines work?
8.2: Why don't magnetic perpetual motion machines work?
8.3: Why don't mechanical perpetual motion machines work?
8.4: Magnets can levitate.  Where is the energy from?
8.5: But its been patented!
8.6: The oil companies are conspiring to suppress my invention
8.7: My machine gets its free energy from <X>
8.8: Can gyroscopes neutralise gravity?
8.9: My prototype gets lighter when I turn it on.

AIDS
----

9.1: What about these theories on AIDS?
9.1.1: The Mainstream Theory
9.1.2: Strecker's CIA Theory
9.1.3: Duesberg's Risk-Group Theory

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
==========

0.1: What is sci.skeptic for?
-----------------------------

[Did anyone save the Charter? PAJ]

Sci.skeptic is for those who are skeptical about claims of the
paranormal to meet with those who believe in the paranormal.  In this
way the paranormalists can expose their ideas to scientific scrutiny,
and if there is anything in these ideas then the skeptics might learn
something.

However this is a very wide area, and some of the topics covered might
be better kept in their own newsgroups.  In particular the evolution
vs. creation debate is best kept in talk.origins.  General New Age
discussions belong in talk.religion.newage.  Strange "Heard it on the
grapevine" stories belong on alt.folklore.urban, which discusses such
things as vanishing hitchhikers and the Everlasting Lightbulb
conspiracy.  Serious conspiracy theories should be kept on
alt.conspiracy, and theories about the assassination of President
Kennedy should be kept on alt.conspiracy.jfk.  CROSS-POSTING from
these groups is NOT APPRECIATED by the majority of sci.skeptic
readers.

The discussion of a topic in this FAQ is not an attempt to have the
final word on the subject.  It is simply intended to answer a few
common questions and provide a basis for discussion of common topics.

0.2: What is sci.skeptic not for?
---------------------------------

The scope of sci.skeptic extends into any area where hard evidence can
be obtained, but does not extend into speculation.  So religious
arguments about the existence of God are out of place here (take them
to alt.atheism or talk.religion.*).  On the other hand discussion
about miracles is to be welcomed, since this is an issue where
evidence can be obtained.

Topics that have their own groups should be taken to the appropriate
group.  See the previous answer for a partial list.

Also out of place are channelled messages from aliens.  If your
channelled message contains testable facts then post those.  Otherwise
we are simply not interested.  Take it to alt.alien.visitors.

The posting of large articles (>200 lines) is not a way to persuade
people.  See the section on "closed minded skeptics" below for some
reasons for this.  I suggest you summarise the article and offer to
mail copies to anyone who is interested.

Sci.skeptic is not an abuse group.  There is a regrettable tendency
for polite discussion here to degenerate into ad-hominem flames about
who said what to whom and what they meant.  PLEASE DO NOT FLAME.  You
won't convince anyone.  Rather the opposite.

0.3: What is CSICOP?  What is its address?
------------------------------------------

CSICOP stands for the "Committee for the Scientific Investigation of
Claims Of the Paranormal".  They publish a quarterly magazine called
"The Skeptical Inquirer".  Their address is:

    Skeptical Inquirer,
    Box 703,
    Buffalo, NY 14226-9973.

Tel. [phone] voice, 716-636-1733 fax.

Note that this is a new address.

0.4: What is "Prometheus"?
--------------------------

Prometheus Books is a publisher specialising in skeptical books.
Their address is:

    Prometheus Books
    700 Amherst Street
    Buffalo, NY 14215-9918

0.5: Who are some prominent skeptics?
-------------------------------------

James "The Amazing" Randi is a professional stage magician who spends
much time and money debunking paranormal claims.  He used to offer a
reward of $100,000 to anyone who can demonstrate paranormal powers
under controlled conditions, but has had to exhaust that fund to pay
legal expenses in the series of lawsuits that have been brought
against him since 1988.  Currently, he can offer only a $10,000
promissory note.  Anyone who wants to contribute to his defense can do
so via:

 The James Randi Fund
 c/o Robert Steiner, CPA
 P.O. Box 659
 El Cerrito, CA 94530

The lawsuit by Geller against Randi is still going on. There is a
mailing list for updates on the situation, which originates from the
account <[e-mail]>.  [To subscribe, you should probably
send mail to <[e-mail]>.]

Martin Gardner is an author, mathematician and amateur stage magician
who has written several books dealing with paranormal phenomena,
including "Science: Good, Bad and Bogus" and "Fads and Fallacies in
the Name of Science".

Philip J.  Klass retired after thirty-five years as a Senior Editor of
"Aviation Week and Space Technology" magazine, specializing in
avionics. He is a founding fellow of CSICOP, and was named a Fellow of
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). He has
won numerous awards for his technical journalism. His principal books
are:

   UFO Abductions, A Dangerous Game   (Prometheus, 1988)

   UFOs, The Public Deceived  (Prometheus, 1983)

   UFOs Explained  (Random House, 1974)

Susan Blackmore holds a Ph.D in parapsychology, but in the course of her
Ph.D research she became increasingly disillusioned and is now highly
skeptical of paranormal claims.

Ray Hyman is a professor of psychology at the University of Oregon.
He is one of the major external, skeptical critics of parapsychology.
In 1986, he and parapsychologist Charles Honorton engaged in a
detailed exchange about Honorton's ganzfeld experiments and
statistical analysis of his results which was published in the Journal
of Parapsychology.  A collection of Hyman's work may be found in his
book The Elusive Quarry: A Scientific Appraisal of Psychical Research,
1989, Prometheus.  This includes "Proper Criticism", an influential
piece on how skeptics should engage in criticism, and "'Cold Reading':
How to Convince Strangers that You Know All About Them."

James Alcock is a professor of psychology at York University in
Toronto.  He is the author of the books Parapsychology: Science
or Magic?, 1981, Pergamon, and Science and Supernature: A Critical
Appraisal of Parapsychology, 1990, Prometheus.

Joe Nickell is a former private investigator, a magician, and
an English instructor at the University of Kentucky.  He is the
author of numerous books on paranormal subjects, including Inquest
on the Shroud of Turin, 1982, Prometheus.  He specializes in
investigating individual cases in great detail, but has recently
done some more general work, critiquing crop circles, spontaneous
human combustion, and psychic detectives.

[I gather Isaac Asimov wrote on skeptical issues.  Can someone tell me
more?  PAJ]

[Can someone supply me with potted biographies and publication lists
of these and other people? PAJ]

0.6: Aren't all skeptics just closed-minded bigots?
---------------------------------------------------

People who have failed to convince skeptics often say "Well all
skeptics are just closed-minded bigots who won't listen to me!".  This
is not true.  Skeptics pay close attention to the evidence.  If you
have no evidence then you will get nowhere.

Unfortunately life is short.  Most of us have better things to do than
investigate yet another bogus claim.  Some paranormal topics,
especially psi research and UFOlogy, produce vast quantities of low
grade evidence.  In the past people have investigated such evidence
carefully, but it always seems to evaporate when anyone looks at it
closely.  Hence skeptics should be forgiven for not bothering to
investigate yet another piece of low grade evidence before rejecting
it.

Of course there are some who substitute flaming and rhetoric for
logical argument.  We all lose our temper sometimes.

0.7: Aren't all paranormalists just woolly-minded fools?
--------------------------------------------------------

No.  Some just pick a belief and then search for evidence to support
it.  Others have had experiences which they find compelling evidence
for belief.  This includes channellers, palmists and dowsers.  Shouting
won't convince these people.  The best tactic is to explain why you
think they are wrong, and do it slowly and quietly.

Of course, some of them are confidence tricksters out for a fast buck.
But its best to assume innocence unless you can prove guilt.

[Any paranormalists out there want to add something? PAJ]

0.8: What is a Conspiracy Theory?
---------------------------------

A conspiracy theory is a belief that there is a large-scale conspiracy
by those in power to mislead and/or control the rest of the world.
Consider the following example:

    There is a conspiracy amongst the computer programmers to
    control the world.  They are only allowing the public to have
    simple machines, while they control the really powerful ones.
    There is a computer in <city> they call "The Beast".  It has
    records about everyone.  They use this information to
    manipulate the politicians and businessmen who ostensibly rule
    the world into doing their will.  The Beast was prophesied in
    the Book of Revelation.

Conspiracy theories divide the world into three groups.  The
Conspirators, the Investigators, and the Dupes.  Conspirators have a
vast secret.  The Investigators have revealed parts of the conspiracy,
but much is still secret.  Investigators are always in great danger of
being silenced by Conspirators.  Dupes are just the rest of us.  Often
the Conspiritors show a mixture of incredible subtlety and stunning
stupidity.

Evidence produced by the Investigators is always either circumstantial
or evaporates when looked at carefully.  The theories can never be
disproved, since any evidence to the contrary can be dismissed as
having been planted by the Conspirators.  If you spend any time or
effort digging into the evidence produced by Investigators then you
will be labelled a Conspirator yourself.  Of course, nothing a
Conspirator says can be believed.