I agree with that argument in this case, but it’s a very overused, and often bad argument. For example, with the moon landing, it’s definitely possible to have that many people conspiring, it’s much easier to debunk it by pointing out simple facts like it would’ave been more money to fake it than to do the real thing at the time. It’s the sort of argument that is used to say “it’s impossible for the class consciousness bourgeoisie to be conspiring to oppress the working class, because that’s too many people to coordinate.”
I of course don’t believe that argument works all the time, I was just pointing out that getting hostile state actors to work together would be a near impossible herculean feat.
Like you mentioned with the moon landing example, I feel that my argument works well in support of other evidence, not just as a standalone infallible point.
I agree with that argument in this case, but it’s a very overused, and often bad argument. For example, with the moon landing, it’s definitely possible to have that many people conspiring, it’s much easier to debunk it by pointing out simple facts like it would’ave been more money to fake it than to do the real thing at the time. It’s the sort of argument that is used to say “it’s impossible for the class consciousness bourgeoisie to be conspiring to oppress the working class, because that’s too many people to coordinate.”
I of course don’t believe that argument works all the time, I was just pointing out that getting hostile state actors to work together would be a near impossible herculean feat.
Like you mentioned with the moon landing example, I feel that my argument works well in support of other evidence, not just as a standalone infallible point.
Of course