"Conspiracy theories,"

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I can't post any links for now until I've either posted 5 times or been on here 5 days, anyhow, for me most "conspiracy theories" are in fact on further investigation, usually the truth. Not always, there are some flat out stupid, preposterous conspiracy theories, but Nazi Germany was once a conspiracy theory, USSR, the slave trade, the witch trials, the trail of tears, the crusades, sterilizations of the disabled, all of these things were in a sense conspiracies. And they are all undisputed historical fact. To me, conspiracy is a mere part of human nature. When humans evolved from the wild, we had to adopt to a psychopathic scene (nature), which lead to a psychopathic survival of the fittest... Hence, we've adopted this into our DNA. People conspire every day on every level of society, lets say Lisa suspects her boyfriend Brian may be cheating on her, she may conspire to spy on him or have a girlfriend keep an eye on him, or w/e. Today's social scene itself is chock to the brim with pointless drama, he said/she said, "friends" conspiring at some level to 1up each other. And if this happens at such a low level of society, how much worse must it get when greedy and powerful governments are involved? If humans survived from the wild, by adopting a might-makes-right, survival of the fittest, brutally hierarchical way of surviving, why would this not also apply to government?

Another question I'd like to propose is the myth "it can't happen here," we've seen poverty, despotism, in countries all over the world and throughout time. With that being said, it seems to me to be rather naive to believe we are an exception to the laws of history and human nature. In fact, I'm nearly certain people in Germany once thought that way too, then the Nazi's took over. It didn't happen over night though.

I dont think you will find many supporters on this forum, most of them still belive 911 was done by Muslims.

Yeah, this is a tough crowd. Most also think that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, that the Apollo 11 moon landing took place, and that Elvis is dead...

Yeah I sort of figured, chances are though I'll reach at least maybe 1 or 2 people here. There's always a small minority of people on autism forums who get it. SirCentrum was one of them, but I dunno if he still posts here anymore or not.

Hes another example for you, for years you were called a looney tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist if you claimed the Elite gathered together in a secret group known as the Bilderbergs, due to the hard work of such as Alex Jones they have been exposed to the extent its now in the mainstream media and this newspaper even publishes a list of attendees!

LINK TO BILDERBERG ARTICLE

What happens now though is not one of the deniers ever comes out and says, "Gee, you were right, Iam sorry for calling you childish names", no, they say things like, "that was never a conspiracy theory, everybody knew about the Bilderbergs".

Will be the same one day with 911 with them all saying, "Well yeah, it was always obvious it was Zionism behind 911, and they just blamed Islam to get the public to back their wars"

Mainstream history is all wrong! It says that Hitler killed himself, and that the US nuked Japan. Well... Whatever helps them sleep at night.

The shape-shifting lizards had Diana murdered in that Paris tunnel...

To use a Matrix metaphor, alot of people like swallowing the blue pill because they simply don't care about them or would never question what's being told to them. When it comes down to it.. it depends on the individual conspiracy theory.. many have proven to be true over the years..

Conspiracy theorists are either very bored people who haven't achieved much in life and want some intellectual recognition or they have schizophrenia.

Elvis never did no drugs.

I take exception, and would gladly debate you on a conspiracy theory.

There is no real debate with conspiracy theorists. Debates requires a certain degree of reasoning from both sides. Conspiracy theorists aren't reasonable when they blindly defend their claims in ways that don't allow for them to be falsified at all. They shouldn't even be called theories because they're nowhere close to that.

I take a different view.

As a so called "conspiracy theorist," I find debates pointless because people (1) demand that I prove to a certainty that I am right when if such evidence was available the mainstream press wouldn't be able to ignore it, and (2) what the mainstream accepts as "the truth" is basically the government's story with cherry-picked evidence to back it up.

How can you prove your point when you are expected to produce absolute proof but the other side is given the presumption of having told the truth when it has a history of lying and withholding evidence AND only offers what it chooses to offer as evidence.

The proper standard should be one of credibility. If Party A is an established liar and proposes its version of what happened and Party B can punch holes in that claim with evidence which is irrefutable in proving A's claim to be false, who should you be inclined to believe? A rational person would be inclined to believe A is lying and that B is likely telling the truth. Then, it's a question of motivations. Does A gain anything by lying or having it's story believed? What does B gain? Most people out to expose "the truth" have very little to gain (indeed, they are often vilified and considered borderline insane), but the people upholding the official story have much to maintain/lose if their story is proven to be false.

I can prove that the DNA evidence against OJ Simpson tied him to the crime scene...even though the test results were sealed. How? Simple legal reasoning.

If the DNA test was negative, his defense team would have fought to have it entered into evidence. If the test was inconclusive, they would fight to have it entered as a tool to introduce reasonable doubt. THE ONLY OUTCOME THEY WOULD WANT KEPT OUT OF COURT IS A POSITIVE TEST RESULT.

QED. But a lot of people don't understand that logic. They argue that if it's not revealed, you can't know the outcome. Logically, no competent attorney would exclude evidence that serves to exonerate their client in a murder trial.

When mainstream people refuse to open their minds (likely because they don't want to face the possibility that something horrible may be real), you can't maintain a debate or dialog with them. The first rule in productive debating is that each side must be willing to admit that they could be wrong. If you can't get that far, there is no point in debating anything.

Yes, I get it. You're a very special person who knows better than all those mainstream people and your view dominates all other views that are in disagreement including expert scientific consensus on matters that can be verified/debunked by science.

We had a bit of discussion in Psychology recently about conspiracy theories and views that rely on extreme selective attention.

For example, 9/11 demolition "theory" ignores the extremely low probability of it being valid due to the amount of preparation and efforts required to set up the stuff needed for demolition and, worse, in secret without anyone outside of the conspiracy knowing and without anyone in on it ever confessing to the crime.

I think the whole Exo-Vaticana and new age/alien apocalypse is probably both the scariest and the most cogent I've come across. Yes, it's incredibly woo-ridden but the dot connections are more than a little unnerving.

Pretty much the story goes you have the mystery religions of Sumer/Babylon and the gods of antiquity, Nephilim, etc. coming back for the end times battle with the forces of Christ. Manly P Hall in Secret Teachings of All the Ages (which I had the chance to read in the last few weeks) triangulates it in terms of explaining the goals of everything Templar, Roscicrucian, and today's outgrowth of Rosicrucianism in the form of Freemasonry, for all of which the Great Work is to eradicate the world religions and reinstitute Atlantis - which had 10 islands per Plato (7 small, three large), ten kings, and they want to bring this under one world government (biochips for money) and one world religion (new age/theosophy as well as Luciferic initiation). To add to that the Rosicrucian alchemical goal is to bring humanity to pre-fall conditions by reuniting the sexes into a hermaphroditic state to produce Adam Kadmon or pre-Eve Adam. As for the ET phenomena, a lot of people from Jacques Vallee forward have done an excellent job in making the suggestion that by the sheer nature of how these craft move, often even being orbs of light or things that are cruising at 16,000 mph and make a hard right angle without getting liquified, starbursting into smaller craft, etc. that what we're seeing is likely much more of an eye-candy effect being created by what we would consider extra-dimensional entities instead.

What I know for certain - Catholic Jesuits are nuts. They really seem to believe not only in aliens but that they likely are either a) unfallen or b) that Christ died on the cross on every planet. By extension they firmly believe that there will be an alien savior coming back to take us into the Age of Aquarius, just like the United Nations seems to believe. If any of this is true, reality will be going completely out the window and doing so in some incredibly nasty ways. Their claim is also that the ET's will evangelize us and teach us religion rather than the other way around. I think they need to brush up on Matthew, Luke, and the Apocalypse of John just a tad as they've clearly gotten rusty with it.