Conspiracy theories

[SpacedX]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

A chilling theory

Nah

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, Great Boos Up said:

They do and they all have stars.

The moon landings show no stars. I think they put stars in the pictures randomly but then realised stars have fixed positions so deleted them all as someone could always tell that they were random and fake. No computer power back then had the capability to generate position and brightness of millions of stars in their exact location.

Your smartphone has 10x more datapower than any Apollo mission

Utter nonsense on the first. The short and simple is there are no stars in the pictures because they're taken during the day time.

[Webbo]

2 hours ago, seanfox778 said:

. The nazis could all be living it up in Antarctica planning their next move. 

Buying a really thick fcking jumper?

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, seanfox778 said:

On the Hitler in South America subject, some say that a lot of nazi scientists carried on with their futuristic experiments in Antarctica which is most accessible from Argentina I think. It's weird how the only peace treaty that's never been broken is the one about how no one is allowed to go to Antarctica, except research scientists. If really rich people do insist they can charter a plane but they're only allowed to go to one bit which could just be for show. The nazis could all be living it up in Antarctica planning their next move. 

 

Finally, we have a credible alternative explanation for the melting of the polar ice caps.

Global warming isn't caused by carbon emissions or even sunspots, it's caused by exiled centenarian Nazi plotters partying it up in Antarctica.

 

 

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

A chilling theory

 

On the contrary, as explained above, it is a warming theory. 

[Great Boos Up]

14 hours ago, Line-X said:

Then retire to 'your own bubble'.

Phew! that took me an hour internal links and all. Obviously I posted the weaker arguments but have never got my head around the "no stars" bit which I did not state.

Anyway after another half hour read on the differences of visible light diffraction between a vacuum and atmosphere within the electromagnetic spectrum I understand that with the naked eye we may actually perceive stars to be much bigger on earth than in the reality of space and on the moon.

You've changed my mind.

 

(genuinely was tired)

[sm1]

On 17 January 2017 at 21:30, cityfanlee23 said:

Are there any theories you believe, part believe, or want to discuss?

 

One that interested me was the Gold Dinar revival of Gaddafi, it makes perfect sense to me, as if he had managed to implement the policy, the US and UK would have lose hundreds of billions, or even trillions long term.

Is there any conspiracy theories you particularity believe?

 

Do you suffer from Putinitis?

http://www.rense.com/general96/putinitis.html

 

On a more serious note, if you are interested in the reasons for the wars in Libya and later in Syria, George Webb has a series on Youtube called Where is Eric Braverman? It carries on a bit, but i'd start at around day 53 and work your way through.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, Great Boos Up said:

Phew! that took me an hour internal links and all. Obviously I posted the weaker arguments but have never got my head around the "no stars" bit which I did not state.

Anyway after another half hour read on the differences of visible light diffraction between a vacuum and atmosphere within the electromagnetic spectrum I understand that with the naked eye we may actually perceive stars to be much bigger on earth than in the reality of space and on the moon.

You've changed my mind.

 

(genuinely was tired)

I think that's literally the first time I've seen that in the history of the internet and conspiracies.

[Webbo]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

I think that's literally the first time I've seen that in the history of the internet and conspiracies.

Or even Foxestalk.

[SpacedX]

23 hours ago, Great Boos Up said:

Phew! that took me an hour internal links and all. Obviously I posted the weaker arguments but have never got my head around the "no stars" bit which I did not state.

Anyway after another half hour read on the differences of visible light diffraction between a vacuum and atmosphere within the electromagnetic spectrum I understand that with the naked eye we may actually perceive stars to be much bigger on earth than in the reality of space and on the moon.

You've changed my mind.

 

(genuinely was tired)

For me, it's not about right or wrong in this case, what's significant is that you actually took the time to consider and entertain an alternative viewpoint and not only revise your thinking but to have the humility and dignity to say so - which as Babylon so correctly observes is so rare these days.  For challenging your own preconceptions and having an open mind I applaud you. Such appraisal is the basis of the scientific method and true sceptical examination.

 

Ignoring the patently absurd, if anyone presents a conspiracy theory I will always consider both sides - the problem with the moon landing hoax believers is that it originated through people who either have no grasp of the science or chose to conveniently disregard it. Because of this all the arguments that are regurgitated - are easily and routinely dismissed by the application of objective science. The theories themselves are also so deceptively framed that they are designed to hoodwink and easily snare the unsuspecting. The internet has allowed these hoax perpetrators to tap into and mine into a rich seam of stupidity. Give the lay community online access and at the click of a mouse they are overnight an armchair authority on whatever they want to be - and with the current global disenchantment with expertise by people who would rather 'educate' and 'inform' themselves by a facebook meme, is it any surprise that conspiracy theories and fake news are so rife? Why trust a century of evidence based practice, clinical governance and peer reviewed medical research when a quick glance at Jenny McCarthy's twitter feed can 'confirm' that vaccinations cause autism? The internet is so vast, that you can find virtually anything you want to online - often skewed by key words and popular searches governing the way that algorithms direct search engines to respond. So learning to employ your own filter is essential because these people will exploit your internal biases in a bid to get you to 'like', 'share' or 'retweet'. 

 

Someone suggested on this thread that conspiracy theories are 'fun' - I was immediately reminded of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma bombing. Conspiracy theory is primarily motivated by profit - it has become a lucrative global business for those at the top, but it is also agenda ridden, motivated by radicals, fundamentalism, intolerance, anti semitism and as such magnetises the disaffected, the hateful, the paranoid/delusional and outright lunatics, breeding prejudice and intolerance. When I find myself confronted by the notion of 'chemtrails' - (which along with this flat earth movement, is by far the most brainless CS in circulation) - and I read some redneck advocating interfering with or even downing a commercial aircraft because they've read online that a contrail is really a nefarious scheme to control or depopulate the planet through a programme of military spraying orchestrated by the illuminati - I do wonder how the ****ers behind this shameless scaremongering can sleep at night. 

[Webbo]

50 minutes ago, Line-X said:

 

 

Someone suggested on this thread that conspiracy theories are 'fun' - I was immediately reminded of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma bombing. Conspiracy theory is primarily motivated by profit - it has become a lucrative global business for those at the top, but it is also agenda ridden, motivated by radicals, fundamentalism, intolerance, anti semitism and as such magnetises the disaffected, the hateful, the paranoid/delusional and outright lunatics, breeding prejudice and intolerance. When I find myself confronted by the notion of 'chemtrails' - (which along with this flat earth movement, is by far the most brainless CS in circulation) - and I read some redneck advocating interfering with or even downing a commercial aircraft because they've read online that a contrail is really a nefarious scheme to control or depopulate the planet through a programme of military spraying orchestrated by the illuminati - I do wonder how the ****ers behind this shameless scaremongering can sleep at night. 

I think you're indulging in a bit of conspiracy theory yourself there. Anyone can post anything on youtube these days. The people who make these claims are usually just as nutty as the people who believe them.

[SpacedX]

Just now, Webbo said:

I think you're indulging in a bit of conspiracy theory yourself there. Anyone can post anything on youtube these days. The people who make these claims are usually just as nutty as the people who believe them.

Not always. The main perpetrators are often quite shrewd business wise and are simply in it for the money. It's the fringe support that they inadvertently attract or even consciously target in some instances. I was more referring to these middlemen who accommodate said conspiracy because it fits their agenda - quite often the gun toting American far right who perceive libertarian values to be an infringement on their rights. In the US many of the believers are overwhelmingly christian fundamentalists and pentecostal zealots (remember, it if polls are to be trusted, up to 47% of Americans entertain the notion of creationism) and there is a huge antisemitic sentiment driving this notion of a zionist illuminati. Many of the comments on the associated pages - particularly YouTube are abhorrent in the extreme as they are scientifically illiterate. That's one of the great things about free speech - it dangles the noose by which to hang yourself and an online connection where all inhibitions are removed really can bring out the ugly side of humanity.

 

Conspiracy theories thrive on ignorance and promoting fear and prejudice. This as much attracts hatred and often those with agenda ridden prejudice.  This is a very interesting testimony from a few years ago about a chap that renounced the 9/11 truther movement. 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10079244/The-911-conspiracy-theorist-who-changed-his-mind.html

 

Financial interest is only one aspect of this - what is infinitely more significant is people's subjective emotional investment and once that has been pledged it is very hard to reverse. 

 

I find the psychology behind conspiracy theories fascinating. True, as mentioned I concede to some they are a bit of harmless fun. To the more serious adherent however, they are a way of seeking order and explanation in a chaotic and random world. There are no natural disasters, cataclysms or global pandemics anymore - it's all engineered by the elite. This book burning and pitchfork branding mob rule mentality is growing over social media through an innate distrust of authority. Why study when you can learn it all on You Tube and fake news? Why take responsibility for ecological damage through mass consumerism and pollution when you can absolve yourself of responsibility and blame the illuminati instead? Increasing levels of respiratory conditions in our cities? - nothing to do with that 4x4 diesel that's parked on your drive...soaring rates of neurological disease? - can't be because life expectancy is higher, no, it's those strange trails in the sky from aircraft that are responsible. You Tube said so. 

 

The other thing that I find so amusing is that many of the subscribers to this nonsense brand themselves as 'truthers' or 'awake' - as if they are privy to some universal and arcane knowledge through simply having an internet connection. I suppose it's instant and empowering to them and they don't appreciate that true education takes effort and dedication and a genuine critical faculty. The amount of times that someone has exhorted me to "do my research" whilst linking me to some highly biased fringe conspiracy or blatant fake news site or when offering an opinion that does not accord with their own they start bleating 'sheep' at you whilst uncritically accommodating the latest conditioning from infowars. 

 

Bring an opposing viewpoint and you are a sheep, offer objective and impartial demonstrable science and you are a shill peddling disinformation. Small wonder that irony is an still largely an elusive concept in the United States.

 

Technology/the internet should be illuminating, edifying and elucidating. There is so much real knowledge out there to discover and unearth - there are so many genuine causes that these people could champion and advance. Despite the growth in secular thinking,  we nonetheless appear to be regressing to an age in which pseudo science and superstition is rife, the anecdotal is more potent than the empirical and truth is subjective and not independently or impartially verifiable. Upon such a barren landscape conspiracy theories are building an empire. 

 

[Webbo]

I can't see anything that you've said that proves these conspiracy spreaders aren't just whacko. 

 

Btw Libertarian-ism is right wing, it doesn't attack anyone's rights. 

[SpacedX]

41 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Btw Libertarian-ism is right wing, it doesn't attack anyone's rights. 

You are absolutely correct, apologies, I typed that out in haste. And one of those 'rights' is enshrined in the 2nd amendment which is why so many resent the notion of supposed 'liberal' reform in America. 

 

"I can't see anything that you've said that proves these conspiracy spreaders aren't just whacko."

 

At the top of the pile are those that capitalise from and market the phenomena. The perpetrators who have carved a profession out of it. Some of these may be serious in their conviction but I doubt it. 

 

Then there are the two bit snake oil salesmen and the unscrupulous charlatans that have jumped on the bandwagon and exploited it for a quick buck. Of these middlemen there are as you say without question also a high proportion of "whackos".  

 

Of those that subscribe en-masse - and by that I don't mean a mild curiosity or entertaining possibilities, but those that have indiscriminately accepted the entire gamut - some are ill informed or uneducated and others are again utterly unhinged.

 

I think it's more calculating than you think - particularly when it can be motivated by political persuasion and prejudice. The seed is sown and germinated which can then be harvested in the interest of an underlying cause. On the other hand it can be the reverse. A conspiracy theory can attract differing extreme religious and political agendas like moths to a lightbulb. 

 

Thanks again for highlighting the error in my previous post.

[cityfanlee23]

There seems to be a lot of ignorance towards others who believe conspiracy theories,

I'm first to admit I dismiss most of them as some people come to whacky conclusions, but theres seems to be a total denial that the government can ever mislead people in this thread.

 

Take the JFK murder for example, plenty of crazy conspiracies about, but let's not forget WHY they exist, because there are genuine unanswered questions, and so many basic mistakes, if the JFK enquiry had been conducted today it would have been rejected completely, but since it was 54 years ago, it's a closed case that everyone has to accept?

The whole thing was a complete and utter farce and that is where conspiracies come from, yes peoples imaginations run wild sometimes but I try to see it from a different perspective, not just believing what I'm told but asking the same questions conspiracies do and trying to find an answer.

 

If you believe whatever the government tells you, you're probably more foolish than the theorists who are looking for answers.

 

Vice versa for conspiracy addicts who disbelieve everything.

[SpacedX]

56 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

There seems to be a lot of ignorance towards others who believe conspiracy theories,

I'm first to admit I dismiss most of them as some people come to whacky conclusions, but theres seems to be a total denial that the government can ever mislead people in this thread.

 

Take the JFK murder for example, plenty of crazy conspiracies about, but let's not forget WHY they exist, because there are genuine unanswered questions, and so many basic mistakes, if the JFK enquiry had been conducted today it would have been rejected completely, but since it was 54 years ago, it's a closed case that everyone has to accept?

The whole thing was a complete and utter farce and that is where conspiracies come from, yes peoples imaginations run wild sometimes but I try to see it from a different perspective, not just believing what I'm told but asking the same questions conspiracies do and trying to find an answer.

 

If you believe whatever the government tells you, you're probably more foolish than the theorists who are looking for answers.

 

Vice versa for conspiracy addicts who disbelieve everything.

"but theres seems to be a total denial that the government can ever mislead people in this thread."

 

Not at all. Where? 

 

We are discussing the notion of baseless conspiracy theories as an industry and the growth in acceptance of the associated pseudoscience. No one is suggesting that one should "believe everything the government tells you" which is why the application of genuine scepticism and a critical faculty is essential - in addition to statistical literacy and maintaining an objective approach. Conspiracy addled addicts demonstrate none of the aforementioned yet seem to believe that watching a video on YouTube that reinforces their preconceptions makes them critical thinkers overnight. 

 

Governments have always mislead to a greater or lesser extent - from disingenuous politicians to outright propaganda to cover ups. We live in a post truth world, so just as individuals are infinitely more susceptible to conspiracy theories they are just as vulnerable to deception from their leaders.

 

What frustrates me is the fact that there increasingly seems to be little to no recourse - particularly in the papers. I'm do not believe in censorship or restricting the powers of the legitimate press for example because it is the role of the the judicial process to regulate accordingly, however I find it bewildering that both tabloid and broadsheet can publish whatever the **** they like derived from pure conjecture and rumour. The internet is an unsubstantiated mess but although it seems trivial I cannot understand how the red-top dailies can repeatedly run these front pages containing prophecies of meteorological armageddon simply because it sells and no one questions it when the third predicted "killer arctic storm" in a fortnight fails to materialise. Because this appears to be the mainstream mentality, perhaps that is why the Leave Campaign got away with emblazoning this bullshit on the side of a bus. In the age of the meme, simply saying something is enough for it to be shared and accommodated as 'fact'.

 

 

[Countryfox]

 

I think Line-X is a Martian.

[SpacedX]

9 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

I think Line-X is a Martian.

Anunnaki actually.

[whoareyaaa]

Even if they did have a cure for cancer or a way to stop it from happening you really think there going to tell the public, you got no chance.

 

The world population is way more than what it should be as it is, there not going to start saving people the more the merrier in there eyes.

 

When was cancer first known? It wouldn't surprise me if they know what causes it.

 

One thing that interests me in this topic is Area 51 a massive research facility spanning back decades imagine some of the shit they know or have developed now.

[Countryfox]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

Anunnaki actually.

 

Aha ! .....     So you are about 485,000 years old and come from the planet Nibiru.       

 

 

[Webbo]

53 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

Even if they did have a cure for cancer or a way to stop it from happening you really think there going to tell the public, you got no chance.

 

The world population is way more than what it should be as it is, there not going to start saving people the more the merrier in there eyes.

 

When was cancer first known? It wouldn't surprise me if they know what causes it.

 

One thing that interests me in this topic is Area 51 a massive research facility spanning back decades imagine some of the shit they know or have developed now.

They can cure quite a lot of cancers.

[SpacedX]

59 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

Even if they did have a cure for cancer or a way to stop it from happening you really think there going to tell the public, you got no chance.

 

The world population is way more than what it should be as it is, there not going to start saving people the more the merrier in there eyes.

 

When was cancer first known? It wouldn't surprise me if they know what causes it.

 

One thing that interests me in this topic is Area 51 a massive research facility spanning back decades imagine some of the shit they know or have developed now.

You are aware that cancer is a generic term for a large group of diseases that can effect any part of the body. It has been suggested by the WHO that more than 30% of cancer deaths could be prevented simply by modifying lifestyle and avoiding key risk factors. 

 

Meanwhile, contrary to your belief, one of the most promising developments in Biotech research appears to be T Cell treatment involving the removal and reintroduction of genetically engineered T Cells into the blood. Not exactly a cure but a treatment which is so potent that it may be approved in as little as six or seven years, which is unheard of in the clinical trials process. Medicine could be on the verge of constructing a third pillar in which the cell is the drug.

[The Doctor]

2 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

Even if they did have a cure for cancer or a way to stop it from happening you really think there going to tell the public, you got no chance.

 

The world population is way more than what it should be as it is, there not going to start saving people the more the merrier in there eyes.

 

When was cancer first known? It wouldn't surprise me if they know what causes it.

 

One thing that interests me in this topic is Area 51 a massive research facility spanning back decades imagine some of the shit they know or have developed now.

Ridiculous. Why would pharma companies not bring something to market that will make them billions? The reason there's not a cure for cancer is because there's multiple types of cancer and a load of risk factors that can "cause" it. There won't be a catch all cure, but there will be treatments, like Chemo.

 

We do know a million things that can cause it, this is common knowledge. 

[whoareyaaa]

Interesting.

[whoareyaaa]

well thats my theory debunked!

[Great Boos Up]

The Large Hadron Collider built by CERN to discover more about particle physics and the constituents of matter is infact a cover to spend massive amounts of EU money on the worlds largest underground Go-Kart track.