Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy Thread

[MPH]

3 hours ago, SystonFox said:

There’s got to be more to the 9/11 stuff. Aside from all the jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams etc.

 

those planes hit the towers at least 3/4 up or above (without re-watching I don’t know) and they came down in a matter of hours. Either they fall instantly or not at all. I’m not having all of it.

 

terrible disaster and all that but something just isn’t right

 

 

some of the explanations given was that thousands of pounds worth of jet fuel spilled down the lift shafts down into the lower levels of the buildings. The  resulting  fires  didn’t melt the steel but  weakened it  - they had already used a cheaper grade steel to construct the buildings than what was recommended because it was cheaper, so a bit of a construction flaw too. And if you see footage of those planes, some of them were all over the place and were being flown quite erratically. Clearly not expert pilots.

[Dunge]

16 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

I have always been more surprised with how people, with only months experience in a flying school, can suddenly be able to fly a jet aircraft. 

Surely once you’ve learned the basics that’s all you’d need? Learn to direct it; any emergency would be worth the “risk” and they wouldn’t need to know how to land it.

 

I generally have a lot of problems with conspiracy theories in principle. Moon landings, Diana dying in a car crash, 9/11, Covid - I’m content that they’re all what they look like and s..t just happens. The only thing in Covid I still have questions over is the accidental lab leak theory, figuring it’s more likely than not that it’s natural but not ruling it out. The rest was just s..t happening.

 

I appreciate that’s not a very fun or interesting take. But maybe that’s part of the attraction of conspiracy theories? They make for something interesting to talk about rather than facing a dull truth that the world is full of unpredictable misery. Or like the fun, magical solution to an Agatha Christie novel rather than it being the guy found standing over the body with a blood-stained knife.

 

Traditionally I wouldn’t mind. People can believe what they like, etc. But recently that seems to have turned into direct action, people targeting government scientists in the world because they don’t like lockdowns, QAnon, etc. And there seems to be a trend out there that once people poke their way down a rabbit hole they only get pulled deeper and deeper into a supposedly interconnected warren. In other words, these things are starting to have a big impact on society and I worry about the sheer number of people being drawn into them.

[Sampson]

2 hours ago, Dunge said:

I generally have a lot of problems with conspiracy theories in principle. Moon landings, Diana dying in a car crash, 9/11, Covid - I’m content that they’re all what they look like and s..t just happens. The only thing in Covid I still have questions over is the accidental lab leak theory, figuring it’s more likely than not that it’s natural but not ruling it out. The rest was just s..t happening.

 

I appreciate that’s not a very fun or interesting take. But maybe that’s part of the attraction of conspiracy theories? They make for something interesting to talk about rather than facing a dull truth that the world is full of unpredictable misery. Or like the fun, magical solution to an Agatha Christie novel rather than it being the guy found standing over the body with a blood-stained knife.

This is quite an interesting point actually.

 

I remember someone, it may have been Dan Carlin on one of his podcasts, talking about the JFK assassination conspiracy theories who was pondering whether conspiracy theories are actually often used to give comfort to people that humanity has a sense of control over things and its potential future.

 

Like the idea that one random nobody can make random decision one random day which can cause massive chaos to the world is actually far more frightening a thought than the idea that events are perfectly designed and crafted by the people in control, which is the ultimate crux of most conspiracy theories. And that a lot of conspiracy theories are actually trying to give humans a sense of reason and a humans sense of order and control to the world - that someone's always actually in control in the direction of humanity is actually far more comforting a thought than the idea that it's all really just chaos and some randomer on a grassy knoll can cause chaos and change the direction of the world and some randomer making another decision can bring society crashing down tomorrow.

Same thing with covid I think but replace some randomer with some random quirk of nature. It's more comforting to believe there's people in control of society and the direction of humanity if you say the Chinese government did it to try and help bring them to becoming the #1 world super power - than to say it was just some random mutation in nature, And it's easier to think it's some government scheme by those who control the future of humanity to think all of humanity, society and modern civilisation is all at the random whim of a quadrillion random decisions of random people, animals, microbes and random spins of quarks.

Edited 18 April 2022 by Sampson

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Sampson said:

This is quite an interesting point actually.

 

I remember someone, it may have been Dan Carlin on one of his podcasts, talking about the JFK assassination conspiracy theories who was pondering whether conspiracy theories are actually often used to give comfort to people that humanity has a sense of control over things and its potential future.

 

Like the idea that one random nobody can make random decision one random day which can cause massive chaos to the world is actually far more frightening a thought than the idea that events are perfectly designed and crafted by the people in control, which is the ultimate crux of most conspiracy theories. And that a lot of conspiracy theories are actually trying to give humans a sense of reason and a humans sense of order and control to the world - that someone's always actually in control in the direction of humanity is actually far more comforting a thought than the idea that it's all really just chaos and some randomer on a grassy knoll can cause chaos and change the direction of the world and some randomer making another decision can bring society crashing down tomorrow.

Same thing with covid I think but replace some randomer with some random quirk of nature. It's more comforting to believe there's people in control of society and the direction of humanity if you say the Chinese government did it to try and help bring them to becoming the #1 world super power - than to say it was just some random mutation in nature, And it's easier to think it's some government scheme by those who control the future of humanity to think all of humanity, society and modern civilisation is all at the random whim of a quadrillion random decisions of random people, animals, microbes and random spins of quarks.

This is spot on.

 

We can (and should) steer, but we can never truly control. Not for a long time down the path of technological evolution, anyway, if at all.

 

Conspiracy theories are often a way to add reason to a universe that often simply doesn't have any, and that scares people. And to take a really deep dive...organised religion (as opposed to singular religious belief) is similar in thought IMO.

 

But we all have different ways of coping with the world as it is, and as long as it harms no one else...

[ozleicester]

The size of the bubble on my cup of tea, is not an accurate predictor of my wealth!

Clearly PR bullshit by PG Tips and water companies. 

[HighPeakFox]

I've read quite a bit about JFK's murder, and it gives me no comfort whatsoever to see how manipulated figures such as Oswald were, and how much evidence there is of a massive plot to remove the President in a most public way. JFK was, in American terms and given the context of America's utter paranoia about Communism and race, pretty radical in what he was doing and saying, and it shouldn't be forgotten he was trying to dismantle the CIA - that's a matter of record.

[Facecloth]

6 hours ago, Sampson said:

This is quite an interesting point actually.

 

I remember someone, it may have been Dan Carlin on one of his podcasts, talking about the JFK assassination conspiracy theories who was pondering whether conspiracy theories are actually often used to give comfort to people that humanity has a sense of control over things and its potential future.

 

Like the idea that one random nobody can make random decision one random day which can cause massive chaos to the world is actually far more frightening a thought than the idea that events are perfectly designed and crafted by the people in control, which is the ultimate crux of most conspiracy theories. And that a lot of conspiracy theories are actually trying to give humans a sense of reason and a humans sense of order and control to the world - that someone's always actually in control in the direction of humanity is actually far more comforting a thought than the idea that it's all really just chaos and some randomer on a grassy knoll can cause chaos and change the direction of the world and some randomer making another decision can bring society crashing down tomorrow.

Same thing with covid I think but replace some randomer with some random quirk of nature. It's more comforting to believe there's people in control of society and the direction of humanity if you say the Chinese government did it to try and help bring them to becoming the #1 world super power - than to say it was just some random mutation in nature, And it's easier to think it's some government scheme by those who control the future of humanity to think all of humanity, society and modern civilisation is all at the random whim of a quadrillion random decisions of random people, animals, microbes and random spins of quarks.

Can we send this to Matt Le Tissier?

[Fox92]

10 hours ago, Dunge said:

Surely once you’ve learned the basics that’s all you’d need? Learn to direct it; any emergency would be worth the “risk” and they wouldn’t need to know how to land it.

 

I don't know that much about flying but I'd have thought you need to know more than basics because it becomes more than just flying doesn't it. I mean, they all turned away from their flight path, so had autopilot turned off, and were performing acts such as turning an aircraft back on itself. Not only have experienced pilots said how difficult stuff like this is but also don't forget one of them nearly hit another aircraft in mid air, so they couldn't have been that aware of what they were doing. 

 

Just doesn't add up to me. 

[SpacedX]

1 minute ago, Fox92 said:

I don't know that much about flying but I'd have thought you need to know more than basics because it becomes more than just flying doesn't it. I mean, they all turned away from their flight path, so had autopilot turned off, and were performing acts such as turning an aircraft back on itself. Not only have experienced pilots said how difficult stuff like this is but also don't forget one of them nearly hit another aircraft in mid air, so they couldn't have been that aware of what they were doing. 

 

Just doesn't add up to me. 

What do you think of the Paul is dead/Faul claims? 

[Fox92]

Just now, Line-X said:

What do you think of the Paul is dead/Faul claims? 

hahah no chance.

 

Although I do love how the band played on it and would put things in songs!

[SpacedX]

3 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

hahah no chance.

 

Although I do love how the band played on it and would put things in songs!

But there is a serious point here I guess. You are highly knowledgeable about the history of the Beatles - you know how absurd and inaccurate the claims are. It's simply a case that those that believe it aren't and don't. It's presented in such a way to be convincing and compelling. What I find is, that people will spout conspiracy theory for two reasons - one, they have no knowledge of the actual subject/topic whatsoever or two, because they think it makes them sound discerning and clever. Sometimes it's a combination of both. "Critical thinkers' supposedly 'thinking out of the box' - and yet they are either to lazy or critically impaired to challenge the claims of the conspiracy theory itself or learn about the topic.

 

It's instant armchair expertise and it has become such a lucrative and enticing enterprise for some of the perpetrators post infowars, that it's not dissimilar to a production line. Also, if you don't actually have any knowledge of the subject itself, the content and production can often be highly persuasive. There's a three and a half hour video posted on this thread called 'American Moon'. A great deal of time, effort and resource has gone into it. If you have no knowledge about the Apollo programme or spaceflight whatsoever then I can see why it seems so plausible. If however you do, it's immediately obvious that it is full of ridiculous assumption, inference, deception, scientific and historical inaccuracies and tenuous correlation. The producers of this know exactly what they are doing, because it is their stock in trade and there is a market for it. 

 

Belief in widespread conspiracy theories is most likely to be a product of our own personal incredulity and ignorance, and as @leicsmac observes, the need to assign and ascribe order to a chaotic world. That is not to suggest that all of them are baseless, but where the knowledge and the independent verification is available to routinely debunk them, then a You Tube video or a social media post should not substitute for that. 

 

 

[Benguin]

I like to be stood on firm ground. Some very shaky epistemology or lack thereof in this thread, particularly by those who claim knowledge is there guide for what to believe. 

[LCFCCHRIS]

Many conspiracy theories will be complete BS but I for one am happy they exist (with a healthy dose of common sense when looking at them). It's good to question the official narrative on things. Of course people go down rabbit holes but that's just the way the internet works. You start looking at a certain subject a lot on Facebook or YouTube and it will serve you up similar things.

 

One of the most infamous ones of recent times is the Epstein case, does anybody here really believe he killed himself and the cameras just weren't working? 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51053205.amp

 

Edited 18 April 2022 by LCFCCHRIS

[Sampson]

16 minutes ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Many conspiracy theories will be complete BS but I for one am happy they exist (with a healthy dose of common sense when looking at them). It's good to question the official narrative on things. Of course people go down rabbit holes but that's just the way the internet works. You start looking at a certain subject a lot on Facebook or YouTube and it will serve you up similar things.

 

One of the most infamous ones of recent times is the Epstein case, does anybody here really believe he killed himself and the cameras just weren't working? 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51053205.amp

 

Conspiracy theories and questioning the narrative of things are two very different things though. Anyone can question the narrative on things. Conspiracy theorists though are people who have an honest belief in an entirely alternative sequence of events and that alternative event were set in motion.

 

You can be skeptical about things and question things without firmly believing the exact opposite. Like you can question how people were able to learn to fly planes in 9/11, but there's several massive jumps there, often when you don't have any knowledge of how to fly these things yourself, to genuinely believing 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated the US government.

 

In fact conspiracy theorists often don't question things, which is the point - they just see something on Youtube or in an online post that xyz can't be true and because they don't have the expertise in that area they believe it. In fact it's less about questioning things than actually believing scientific, medical and historical experts who actually do fo question things having expertise to reach the official narrative a lot of the time.

Edited 18 April 2022 by Sampson

[Bellend Sebastian]

I idly Googled 'psychology of conspiracy theories' and naturally there's a ton of stuff on it, including recurring themes around the sort of people that are into them.

 

I only know one IRL person who's into conspiracy theories and to nobody's amazement he ticks every single box

[thursday_next]

It might also help if the news was actually the news, rather than a PC holier-than-thou version of what the news was supposed to be about. I don't know how you solve this, other than making the news still more unpleasant because you'd have to take into account the views of people who don't fit in to the standard narrative. They do vote, but they don't count. In the circumstances it's not surprising that many of the tinfoil conspiracy theorists shout 'fake news' because it is 'fake news' only not in the way that they're talking about.

 

Two of the biggest nations on earth have state-run news channels because they can see the way it's going all too clearly and they don't like it. If you had to administer China and you had to take into account the at times questionable views of 1.5 billion people as filtered through the sort of people who run television stations then you'd go mad. A poll on the Spratley Islands, opinion pieces about the treatment of the Uighur Muslims, what to do about Taiwan, was Covid actually lab-generated or what - no, it's easy to see why they would have a state-run media, and get on with running the country in the way that they see fit. It's like Top having to bear in mind the views of Foxestalk - 'Well, do you want me to sack Rodgers or not? In your own time - come back to me when you've got a decision'. 

 

I haven't got much time for conspiracy theorists, but I am suspicious about the aftermath of Lockerbie, and I am not sure that the official account bears much resemblance to the truth, but there's nothing I can do about it, it happened long ago, and I may well be entirely wrong. 

Edited 18 April 2022 by thursday_next

[RumbleFox]

The moon landing 😂. No one really believes that’s a fake right? 

[RumbleFox]

44 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

I idly Googled 'psychology of conspiracy theories' and naturally there's a ton of stuff on it, including recurring themes around the sort of people that are into them.

 

I only know one IRL person who's into conspiracy theories and to nobody's amazement he ticks every single box

Yeah I’ve read a lot of those too, interesting stuff. It always seems to me that people either believe no conspiracy theories or many. Which suggests it’s more about the person than the theory. 

[Strokes]

Just now, RumbleFox said:

The moon landing 😂. No one really believes that’s a fake right? 

Yes mate, the moon is made of cheese and that video was clearly a desert.

[HighPeakFox]

Conspiracies happen, most are benign - but to automatically assume everything that happens is a conspiracy/fix is as unthinking a position as automatically fawning over a flag.

[Dunge]

3 hours ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Many conspiracy theories will be complete BS but I for one am happy they exist (with a healthy dose of common sense when looking at them). It's good to question the official narrative on things. Of course people go down rabbit holes but that's just the way the internet works. You start looking at a certain subject a lot on Facebook or YouTube and it will serve you up similar things.

 

One of the most infamous ones of recent times is the Epstein case, does anybody here really believe he killed himself and the cameras just weren't working? 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51053205.amp

 

Depends how deep a conspiracy you’re thinking here. Personally I think it’s entirely plausible that he himself organised paying off the guards so that he could kill himself rather than face judgement. For him, I can easily believe that being confronted by his crimes and seeing his name dragged through the mud - ie being captured - was worse than death. The “other high-powered pedophiles organised his offing to protect themselves” is, to me, a conspiracy theory that’s another big leap and doesn’t add up.

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

I've personally always found Diana's death to be a bit too convenient, and some of the jfk stuff really makes you sit up and ponder the official narrative surrounding it. What gets me these days though is it doesn't seem possible to just think one or two of these things, it's the increasing polarisation of the world imo, you have people who think there's never been a conspiricy in history on one side and people who think the queen's a lizard, 5g stuff, covid is a hoax, moon landings were faked, tap water is brainwashing you, the earth's flat etc etc etc and no invetweeen. As a big x files fan I got really in to conspiricy theories back in the 90s and as a teen really enjoyed looking in to it and stood up and thought wow this might be something maybe with 5% of all the conspiricy theories I looked in to. Nowadays it's like a lifestyle I just don't get it. 

[LiberalFox]

Questioning things is great. It's just that most conspiracy theories don't do that. They make up a story and then ask other people to prove it wrong. 

[samlcfc]

Always found the idea of life beyond earth very interesting in a scientific sense, but by extension, some of the UAP stories are pretty entertaining if nothing else.

 

It's fun to think about in this respect, but evidence is mostly lacking for any serious analysis. This makes sense, considering the scenario for any science involves a vague chance that something actually exists to measure along with an inability to predict any such phenomenon. Not a great area to practice science!

 

The USS Roosevelt and USS Niimitz stories in recent years were pretty fun for creating a buzz, along with the subsequent and ongoing Congress briefings. Not impossible I guess. Technology such as Von Neumann Probes exist as a thought experiment, but could plausible be created by a sufficiently advanced society. Would be a interesting topic to see validated or put to bed during my lifetime.

 

Edited 18 April 2022 by samlcfc

[Parafox]

So are we talking truth or lies? Subjective or objective? Fact or a distortion of fact? Is there failed connection in what some people think is a reality, that then demands defending because they thought it to be fact? (Flat Earth, God (best not go there))

To actually BELIEVE, IMO you need actual proof of the facts and that you consider them to be factual beyond reasonable doubt.

Otherwise everything could be a conspiracy.

Edited 19 April 2022 by Parafox