Re: TWA Flight 800, reflections on

Ian Goddard (
Sat, 30 May 1998 14:08:09 -0400

At 02:30 AM 5/30/98 -0700, Hara RA wrote:

>> IAN: That there is a conspiracy to conceal
>> witness accounts, the satellite data, radar
>> data, 1/3 of the plane, and more is real.
>How can it be? Doesn't Conspiracy = ~Conspiracy?

IAN: BoInG! But but... now wait a minute there. :)
But seriously: Yes, in that we can meaningfully
denote a given subset of things as "a conspiracy"
if, and only if, we can denote another set of
things that are "not a conspiracy." We would
properly state this: C <=> -C, and if C did
not imply -C, C could not be implied. As
such, this symmetrical implication
defines a logical union.

C = (-C => C) C is its implication by -C.
-C = (C => -C) -C is its implication by C.
The holistic point (so to say) is that the
identity structure of C contains both C and -C.