Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

This is begging the question.

Posted by squirrelpatrick on 20 Feb 2016 at 17:25 GMT

Unless I have missed something I don't understand how one can prove that conspiracies are always revealed by considering a (very small) subset of revealed conspiracies.

Surely one could use a similar procedure to prove that crimes are always reported, that errors are always found, or that there are no stars in the sky we cannot see.

"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte.

No competing interests declared.