Conspiracy theories!

It's been noted that people from extreme political views (ultra liberal or ultra conservative) are more likely to believe in consp. theories. When you're prone to extremes it will express itself in everything you say or do (including your opinions, arguments, research).

An example of some well-known people who I think have and practice extreme views: on the far left it will be Bill Maher and Micheal Moore. On the far right it will be Glenn Beck and Michael Savage. If you listen and follow them, you will think that this whole world is nothing but one big conspiracy theory. LOL.

The truth is always somewhere in the middle. Once you get away from extreme views in general, you will be able to look for facts without any prejudice or bias.

 

The Illuminati 'conspiracy' theory always makes me laugh because in a way it is pretty obvious that there will always be people who want the ultimate power.

I think a great current example of this is the current European Union where powers are being taken from individual countries and decisions are being made from a 'select few' who some are reportedly not even elected!

All the cultish illuminati stuff is I believe quite obviously wrong. As someone above said the real 'Illuminati' is right in front of everyone's eyes!

 

Exactly, extreme views. My best friend is very into conspiracies, to the extreme. Everything has to be a conspiracy. I guess it helps make life more interesting for him.

Speaking of conspiracies, webmaster forums are ones where conspiracies are prevalent to a ridiculous degree. (The Great Google Conspiracy[ies].) To me, I just see these people have never run a real business and don't know how to, they just can't cope with it and it's easier to make a conspiracy rather than face the reality of their mistakes. (Like in the real world, if you do fake advertising there are consequences, so why should you expect it to work online?)

I passed it onto my friend. I had already referred him to a very good debunker site (http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Main_Page), but to be honest I not sure he viewed it as he found a conspiracy about the site too (something like user comments were disappearing). I believe the site does not have comments

 

One of my favorite conspiracy theories is the moon landing conspiracy.

This is from an interview with Neil Armstrong…
On the notion of the moon landing being a conspiracy, Armstrong laughs, and told Malley that there's no way the 800,000 Nasa staff working on the project could have kept a secret, saying: "People love conspiracy theories, they're very attractive. But they were never a concern to me, because I know someone is going to fly back up there and pick up the camera I left there."


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/24/neil-armstrong-rare-interview_n_1541610.html


Of course, you know they edited the interview and he never said any of this

 

Damn it! I knew all the conspiracy theories were true!

 

According to Armstrong, he was forced to reconsider every single detail of the monumental journey after watching a few persuasive YouTube videos, and reading several blog posts on conspiracy theorist Ralph Coleman's website, OmissionControl.org.
"It only took a few hastily written paragraphs published by this passionate denier of mankind's so-called 'greatest technological achievement' for me to realize I had been living a lie, " said a visibly emotional Armstrong, addressing reporters at his home.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/conspiracy-theorist-convinces-neil-armstrong-moon,2796/

Looks like The Onion beat me to it or I would post an in-depth shock-u-mentary about how Neil Armstrong fooled us all... including himself.

 

The issue is not believing in conspiracies or not, but in believing the government's conspiracy theories ("19 towel heads lead by a dialysis-machine dependent guy in a cave pulled off 9-11") vs the private sector's conspiracy theories. I prefer to accept the latter, because the private sector folks don't lie to me as relentlessly as the government does, in protecting their official stories.

It is established fact the government and its compliant media lied to us about WMDs, lied to us about the extent of their domestic surveillance, lied to us about previous false-flag operations they performed or planned from Northwoods, to the Gulf of Tonkin, etc. Just last week, several NTSB investigators came forward to admit the government lied about the Flight 800 crash of 1996, and they were pressured to suppress evidence and hundreds of witnesses showing it was shot down by a missile. And on and on.

Each time we are lied to, to support a government official story or conspiracy theory, we are asked to accept the decrees of authority on face value, and to be nothing but propaganda sponges. At least the private sector conspiracy theorists or seekers of truth tell us the rest of the story, reminds us that the establishment does very frequently lie, and teaches us to practice critical thinking by questioning authority. These are not the marks of psychological weakness, but of strength of character.

It is the supposed conspiracy debunkers who show the signs of insecurity, constantly invoking name calling or derision as a rhetorical tactic, and always misdirecting the discussion away from the essentials. Sweeping dismissals and constant putdowns reveal their intent is to just be contentious and inflammatory. The intent of such tactics is not to reason, but to emotionally intimidate people on the fence from joining the truth side (as they see they would then be berated in the same fashion). That's conditioning people, not getting to the truth.

 

He was speaking of the threat of Communism.

 

The usual strawman debunker argument. Debunkers usually can't debate the main merits or address hard facts, so they run behind the unproven presumption or mere supposition that secrecy is numerically impossible. But actual conspiracy theory (on this or other controversies) doesn't say 800,000 or whatever could have kept a secret, it says most low level personnel were not told about it in the first place, hence didn't have to keep the secret, as the fraud or black op was handled by criminal elements at the top.

Government/elite information control systems operate on the "need to know" concept, where work is organized such that most staff are not informed of the full picture, by design. And the key government workers or military selected for the key assignments are picked based on their ability to keep a secret, or accept what they are told by authority. Thus almost no one is in a position to leak anything, making the secret easily managable.

 

Interesting. "Sweeping dismissals", etc. I guess you would call me a debunker as I don't believe in conspiracy theories by default. I prefer to analyse the available information and make my own decision. I don't assume a conspiracy by default or government innocence. Governments are far from perfect, but frequently tend to be boring.

So, are you (and other conspiracy theorists) the only ones who know the truth ("the truth side")? Something about sweeping comes to mind.

Scott J makes a good point about volume of people being involved. It seems like every newspaper, TV channel, etc, except for ones that agree with conspiracy theories are involved. That is a lot of people.

 

With the many killings in the world & bad things that politicians do for political gain, I don't think that conspiracy theories are far from the truth. People will do anything for personal gain including murder to get what they want to survive.

 

July 21st 1969 man landed on the moon. People around the world watched, some with their own eyes, as three men were propelled into space. Those people who were there for the launch watched as the rocket became a speck in the sky. Grown men’s eyes began to fill with tears as they witnessed the greatest technological achievement of that time.

This was a very emotional moment for many because they realized that mankind can achieve the impossible and they mourned for those that had given their lives to make it happen.


My post was about the moon landing and how ludicrous it is to think it was faked. I’ll entertain the thought of a good conspiracy theory from time to time, but I will not degrade the sacrifices or the achievements of those men on that day.

 

Who let the politics & religion nutjobs out for the day then?...this was supposed to be a fun thread, not one filled with dull pompous drivel.

 

Like I said, a lot of emotionalism, derision and misdirection attends the conspiracy debunker's self-posturing as the superior side, as seen on this thread. I just suggested we stick to the merits and prioritize pursuing the truth, instead of dogma, or the 'fun' invective being flung around. While people had, and have, emotional moments, those emotions often serve the purposes of the state, so certain events fostering such reactions have been staged. Northwoods shows the government is definitely able and willing to plan them.

I'm not actually committed on either side of the moon landing question, but I acknowledge there are two sides to the issue (see example below). Others do not, and that's the difference. In the age of the Internet, any honest person with acess to a search engine knows it's getting too complicated to keep the cover stories covered. Shaking emotional shields at people do not rebut the difficulties with the NASA official story:

http://lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds23.1.html

 

I had written up a long post, but as you come across as lacking objectivity, it would be a waste of time posting it. I'll instead be one of those "superior side" - and similar - you keep mentioning.

"Pursuing the truth"? It's more like beating a dead horse. For example, 9/11 - but not only beating a dead horse, it's also (for me) not letting the people who lost their lives rest in peace.

And surely you've seen Mythbusters? They put the silly moon landing conspiracy to bed!!

For that matter, everyone should watch their thermite episode. Like malky66 mentioned, fun! And Mythbusters sure is fun.

Warning: This show is not for conspiracy theorists.

 

Of course there are two sides to every issue and the grey area in between can be very wide. Yet what one perceives as common sense and (dare I say) a little bit of faith in humanity, another may think of as dogma and lies perpetrated by the establishment.

In this particular issue, it is whether or not man landed on the moon.
I prefer common sense and faith in humanity.

 

So long as the perpetrators of 9-11 have not been brought to justice, or go on to perform additional false flags that take more lives, and cause people to remain propaganda sponges who emotionally fall for whatever narrative is intended by the black ops, it's not a dead horse. Judging by the energy of the critics of 9-11 truth here, it seems to be a very live wire. The more people who are aware of establishment lies, the harder it becomes for them to perpetuate new ones. 'Truthers' carry on to apply public counter-pressure to help prevent or postpone the next false flag from happening.

As for Mythbusters, it's a show that was specifically pressured by the government to never, EVER question or 'bust' any of its cover stories of any kind, so it's no wonder it conformed with the official line. Excuse me as I accept multiple peer-reviewed studies proving nanothermite was used at the WTC, over the once-over lightly cherry-picked take on the data by a TV show. About 100 videos responding to its stilted presentation and faulty debunking efforts can be found Youtube when one takes the time to look.

 

Well, they do a very bad job then.

If I was a conspiracy theorist, I would think that the Illuminati are actually paying these "truthers" to spread nonsense and to distract people from real issues. But they don't have to, because these nutjobs are doing it for free.

 

9-11 false flag, leading to creating emotional pretext for invading and occupying several countries in the past decade, and to millions of deaths = real issue.

9-11 false flag, leading to passage of the Patriot Act and later legislation that has curtailed civil liberties and privacy, and the NSA's creation of a surveillance system that is spying on everybody on earth = real issue.

Against this powerful machine of military death abroad and tyranny at home, on humble dollars 9-11 truth advocates have focused on spreading the message, meanwhile others focus on complaining about the messenger.

 

Most of them died in the attack and the rest had the crap bombed out of them or were shot. That was in reality, but not in "conspiracy world", of course.

Someone (couldn't be you, could it?) mentioned something about believing private companies before government, but strangely if a private company doesn't sing the conspiracy theorist tune, they've been paid off by the government. Odd.

Or this assessment is based upon the fact they wanted it to be a no longer discussed topic on the Discovery forum? Do you realise how heavily moderated a forum that was? First and foremost their reason was (and they stated it) because of how painful a subject it is. Maybe conspiracy theorists can't see it from that view due to their "obsession" with finding the "truth". At least, the "truth" they want, anyway. If their truth doesn't exist, then it will be an impossible task to find it (aside from fabricating it).


Let's see - the thermite thing was by accident. As you know, the episode was about something else, rather than 911. Weird how it suddenly became a government sponsored lie. According to conspiracy theorists.

Now, jet fuel was not the only combustible (think about what is usually in such a building), so the heat was much more than just from jet fuel alone and it's useful for conspiracy theorists to ignore.

You talk about cherry-picked - Ae911Truth and thermite. Enough said when it comes to cherry picking.

Myth busted!

Excuse me while I now go and puke. May our fallen fellow citizens of the world rest in peace.