Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message

Real0ne -> Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/2/2007 9:29:12 PM)

Do i have the correct impression that there are very few people who would consider a conspiracy valid on "any" level?

My impression is that most people pretty much write them off as no such thing.

So are there any conspiracies that are acceptable or certain ones, or none at all? 

Then again maybe people just assume everything is a conspiracy and pay little attention as a result of that position.

It just seems to me the mere mention of conspiracy sets people running away with laughter.

Are there any conspiracies that people really believe happened at some point in history? if so which? How and when did you come the conclusion it was in fact a conspiracy? Before, during, after, ancient history?

How do you all determine if a conspiracy or theory is valid? or not?



SirKenin -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/2/2007 10:02:58 PM)

I write them off because the people spewing them have absolutely zero credibility, whether that be the source or on this board.  I prefer to see valid evidence.  You know.  Something scientific?  Something concrete?  Not something that can be easily refuted by simple scientific fact.  Like the drivel that shows up in OT.



Chaingang -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/2/2007 10:08:58 PM)

I am willing to hear out all kinds of ideas. Everything is a conspiracy - anytime one person collaborates with another person, or with other persons, to do a thing. Only anti-intellectuals refuse to hear something based on it being a "conspiracy theory" instead of weighing the matter for themselves and arriving at their own conclusions.

That said, there are plenty of things that I consider interesting but dead ends from a pragmatic viewpoint and I can't waste a lot of time on them. For example: maybe the Illuminati exist, maybe there's more to skull and bones than meets the eye, maybe there's a Rosicrucian or templar or Masonic connection - but at the end of the day a powerful and monied elite is the same no matter what their philosophical motives or ancient ties. So I discard the mumbo jumbo, which is neither here nor there, and stick to what matters.

What matters is things like the international monetary scene. And I follow that money trail all the time. I don't care why the monied elite do the things they do - my general assumption is that simply want more money and power. Isn't that enough? I should trouble myself with trifles?



SirKenin -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/2/2007 10:16:17 PM)

Good points raised there actually, but I beg to differ with just one minor thing.  I do not think you have to give conspiracy theories any ear time in order to ascertain the truth.  There are PLENTY of resources that present concise factual evidence.  I Myself prefer to cut to the chase.

Now, with that said I have been doing some looking into the KT and the Masons.  They are a fascinating sect and certainly worthy of research.  Their conquest is the discovery of religious truth.  Of knowledge..  At any cost.  That is why the Catholic Church so vigorously persecuted them.  They became too powerful. 

Anyways, that is ultimately what they are all about.  So whether or not Bush is a member of the Masons, or a sect thereof, or not is actually irrelevant.  If he is, power to him.  Maybe he can tell Me where the holy grail is, and what, or who, it is.



seeksfemslave -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 1:09:12 AM)

I believe there was much more to the JFK assassination than ever the public got to know .



luckydog1 -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 1:37:06 AM)

opps posted to wrong thread



UtopianRanger -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 1:45:54 AM)

quote:

That said, there are plenty of things that I consider interesting but dead ends from a pragmatic viewpoint and I can't waste a lot of time on them. For example: maybe the Illuminati exist, maybe there's more to skull and bones than meets the eye, maybe there's a Rosicrucian or templar or Masonic connection - but at the end of the day a powerful and monied elite is the same no matter what their philosophical motives or ancient ties. So I discard the mumbo jumbo, which is neither here nor there, and stick to what matters.


Extremely well said.

I try to stay away from terms like ''The invisible government''  or the ''illuminatti'' Why?  Because such mythical entities have no discernable physical address or website. It doesn't mean they don't exist..... it just means that I can't prove they exist or prove they have any type of power.

But I can't point to organizations /think tanks-- with web sites and physical mailing addresses -- like ''The Council on Foreign relations'', ''PNAC'' and the ''ADL'', that have a big hand in crafting foreign /domestic policy, yet are hugely detrimental to the concept of the ''nation-state'' and the foundation of America.

And then of course I can also mention something that I never see talked about or taken into consideration when it comes to conspiracy theories -- Your '' intuitive prowess ''  - Your ''gut feeling'' .

Have ever watched TV or been involved in a ''deal'' or something and you know the punk-ass your listening to / dealing with, is a liar and a con -- And your completely correct about it?

How bout that?



- R



Zensee -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 1:52:51 AM)

It is paranoid to presume there are conspiracies lurking under every bed. It is lazy to dismiss a theory out of hand marely because it may require some degree of conspiracy to work. Humans are social and political creatures. Conspiracies, great and small, benevolent and despotic, have always been with us and likely always will be.

Telling kids there is a Santa Claus is a casual conspiracy to control children’s behaviour. Every war is the spawn of some conspiracy and the father to many more.

The Masons are an interesting example. Are they a guild of skilled tradesmen, a charitable organization, a backroom deal machine, a synchronised riding-mower brigade, a criminal cabal, a revolutionary movement, protectors of knowledge from tyranny or tyrants that conduct the world’s business in secret? At various times and to varying degrees they have been all these things and more.

Shapes in a fog can be very real but are open to wild interpretation and invention.


Z.


PS: The Holy Grail is the Womb. Sorry if I spoiled the surprise for anyone.



luckydog1 -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 2:07:33 AM)

There are obviously conspiricies in the world, any crime involving more than one person.  Any small group making plans could be considered one.  Grand Secret conspiricies spanning thousands of years?  Not likely.  The amazing thing about lust for power is that it can not be satisfied, you always want more.  Hence the conspiritors will set against each other, its human nature.  Now if you believe that  Humanity was genetically engineered by a race of shape shifting reptilian aliens, who have posed as all of our leaders everywhere since man was created, I don't know what to say.  Archelogical and Genetic evidence speaks against it( but maybe they controll all the archelogists?)  The burning of the Reichstag was certainly a conspiricy, the perps admitted it.  But to compare that to 911.  There were not Jewish terrorists striking at germany and its allies for decades before the Burning of the Reichstag.  Anti Western Muslim groups have been active since ww2( Ironically the Muslim Brotherhood got some support and funds from Hitler to harrass the British in Egypt).  And compare the reaction, we still have elections( and Bushes party lost), the courts rule against Bush, people protest and speak out, no one is silenced.  In Nazi Germany, Real you would already be dead.  Plus if Bush wanted a facist state ect.,  he could have staged a 10-11 and a 12-11, and he certainly would be dictator for life now.  But he didn't.
then to top it off the 911 arguments are based on nonsense, and not a single shred of Scientific evidence has been put forward to challenge the notion, its not scientific untill it has been peer reviewed, which nothing from the 911 scholars for truth has been. 
The entire 911 conspiricy case is rubbish.  People make a living claiming stuff that is easily checked as false.  That a fireman on the fly said "sounds like a bomb" is not the same as him saying "my professional opinion after examining it is that a bomb went off".  or a professor at a mining school saying( again after seeing a few minutes of TV not doing any actuall serious examination) "looks like a bomb went off"  is not the same as him saying my proffessional opinion is that bomb went off.  I have said "it looks like a bomb went off in here", after a party at my house. 
Or consider building 7-- a huge chunck of the larger building chrashed through its roof as it fell( which incidentaly goes against the claim that the building fell perfectly into its own footprint) and destroyed one side of the building.  There are many pictures of it.  From one side you can't see any damage, but from other angles you can see it is ruined( any website that only shows you one side is biased and agenda driven).  Any source that does not mention that it was hit by significant derbis is lying to you.  The Phrase "pull them" can mean many things.  In my life I have used that phrse to refer to taking our nets out of the water when a commercial fisherman, and for pulling items from an oven while a cook.  It does not have the specific meaning of "detonate the charges now".  No matter how many websites claim it does. 
About the big 911 thread in here.  You(no one) can not do a spectral analyusis from a youtube clip.  With out a color ballance it can't be done.  A slight variation in color could mean different things, plus none of us are experts in that anyway.  "look a the color of the flame in a youtube clip, it has to be thermite"
The 911 conspiricy does not stand up to any realistic scrutiny, that is why people laugh at it.  Also some of us had loved ones hurt or killed that day and take it kind of persoanl, that people want to tell ridiculous lies about it for fun and profit.



Zensee -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 2:22:27 AM)

It would be really helpful and respectful of this thread if people didn't bring unfinished business from other threads. It's called cross posting but it's more like cross-pissing (as in using the urinal next to yours rather than your own).

This is a general discussion about the nature of conspiracy not a clearing house for opinions about 9/11, Kenedy, Wacco, Roswell or the "lunar landings".

Thank You,
Z.



sleazy -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 3:13:13 AM)

Everything is a conspiracy, the pretty gal on the ticket counter, the signalman, the train driver, all worked together under some greater power to get me to work today :) I shall soon be conspiring with my colleagues to obtain money from our clients by fullfilling contractural oblications.

I personally am a great cynic. Professionaly I have to cover all the angles, often no matter how outlandish, but at the end of the day Occam's Razor is fairly reasonable method of judgement with a pretty good sucess rate.



Rule -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 6:54:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Do i have the correct impression that there are very few people who would consider a conspiracy valid on "any" level?
I suspect that you have the correct impression. Conspiracies are viable only if the majority of people lack the intellectual abilities to perceive an event as the result of a conspiracy. So by definition only a small minority - perhaps no more than a few people - will become aware of a good conspiracy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
My impression is that most people pretty much write them off as no such thing.
They are sensible. There is nothing that can be done against a powerful conspiracy, so crying wolf would be a waste of time. Crying wolf also draws the attention of the wolves, which is unhealthy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
It just seems to me the mere mention of conspiracy sets people running away with laughter.
The problem is that solid evidence is often lacking and that some of the evidence that is presented is ludicrous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Are there any conspiracies that people really believe happened at some point in history? if so which? How and when did you come the conclusion it was in fact a conspiracy? Before, during, after, ancient history?
When I started to investigate one event, I stumbled across a whole string of conspiracies. Discovering one requires a thorough investigation of a case and an ability to discern between relevant facts and non-relevant facts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
How do you all determine if a conspiracy or theory is valid? or not?

Inconsistencies are telling. Consistencies are telling also: different lines of inquiry that point to the same conclusion or association. The best ones are when you are able to predict something unknown to you at that moment and later investigation proves that the prediction was correct.



toservez -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 7:10:16 AM)

I think there are some theories that might have validation while others are quite unrealistic. Most of those doing with our government, which cannot keep a secret on anything, but in these theories do.

I think though that it becomes a creditability problem when they are put out there. Tough to take any of them seriously when they include so many people and the people promoting them tend to believe all other theories and/or have long been on record with having a grudge or issues with the subject they are bringing up.

Most things that happen in life are quite simple and the overwhelming odds of things that happen that get theories attached are things that are simple as well.



JohnSteed1967 -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 7:19:54 AM)

Conspiracy the two that I look at are JFK and UFO/Roswell. The fact of the matter is this. LBJ and George Bush Sr. were 100% responsible for JFK

the government is lying about UFO's Plain and simple. Infact they just had a siting over O'Hare airport where about a hundred airline pilots saw the thing. Now the FAA says it was nothing but clouds.



farglebargle -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 8:33:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

I write them off because the people spewing them have absolutely zero credibility, whether that be the source or on this board. I prefer to see valid evidence. You know. Something scientific? Something concrete? Not something that can be easily refuted by simple scientific fact. Like the drivel that shows up in OT.


Hey Kenin,

Credibility?

As in:

22. Once BUSH became the Republican candidate in the 2000 presidential election campaign, he and CHENEY informed the general public that they would be reluctant to use military force and did not believe that the United States should engage in "nation-building."

23. On and after January 20, 2001, BUSH and CHENEY caused to be appointed as senior foreign policy advisors and consultants, at least thirty-four persons who had publicly endorsed the PNAC principles of United States global preeminence and use of force to "punish" or "threaten to punish" emerging threats from weapons of mass destruction ("WMD") or impediments to United States access to oil in the Middle East. Of those appointees, eighteen had also publicly advocated forcibly removing Saddam Hussein.

24. In late December 2000, BUSH and CHENEY advised outgoing President William J. Clinton and others that, among potential foreign policy issues, BUSH's primary concern was Iraq.

25. On February 11, 2001, BUSH ordered the first airstrikes since 1998 to be conducted outside of the United Nations ("UN") agreed-upon No-Fly zones, to get Saddam Hussein's "attention."




missturbation -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 9:38:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
I've only read a few replies so please forgive me if i repeat anything.

Do i have the correct impression that there are very few people who would consider a conspiracy valid on "any" level?
I think they are valid for those who believe they truly happened and as such yes they are valid.

My impression is that most people pretty much write them off as no such thing.
Possibly because there are so many and it seems recently everything that has happened has had some conspiracy theory attached to it within days.

So are there any conspiracies that are acceptable or certain ones, or none at all? 
Acceptable? Depends!! For those who truly believe something is to be gained from outing a conspiracy sure its acceptable. For those whose lives have been affected by the event such as 9/11, loss of family, friends etc, well i think its just rubbing salt in the wound. Hard enough to live with the loss of a loved one without someone bringing into play it may be a conspiracy and really your own government was responsible for the deaths. 

Then again maybe people just assume everything is a conspiracy and pay little attention as a result of that position.
i'm sure there are probably conspiracy theories that are true but im of the camp that thinks that what i dont know wont hurt me. A conspiracy theory can only make things worse and as i said above do the people who suffered due to 9/11 really need it all dragging up again and made worse?

It just seems to me the mere mention of conspiracy sets people running away with laughter.
In my opinion because there are just too many events that get people shouting 'conspiracy theory'. Its a little bit like the boy who cried wolf.

Are there any conspiracies that people really believe happened at some point in history? if so which? How and when did you come the conclusion it was in fact a conspiracy? Before, during, after, ancient history?
No not as yet.

How do you all determine if a conspiracy or theory is valid? or not?
I don't i tend to ignore them, too much other stuff to worry about and concentrate on.




farglebargle -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 9:43:54 AM)

Conspiracies are real, and in fact Conspiring to defraud the Federal Government is a crime, 18 USC 371 .



subfever -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 10:24:13 AM)

Generally speaking, most people believe in what they want to believe in... and typically reject information that conflicts with their core belief systems.

I've found that more often than not, those who readily reject conspiracies theories tend to be invested in the status-quo. They also tend to be control-oriented people who are very uncomfortable with the possibilities that there are matters going on around them which are completely beyond their control.  It's easier for them to just scoff at a conspiracy theory and just lump it in with more far-fetched theories... and label believers as tin-hat nutballs.



missturbation -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 10:29:13 AM)

I've found that more often than not, those who readily reject conspiracies theories tend to be invested in the status-quo. They also tend to be control-oriented people who are very uncomfortable with the possibilities that there are matters going on around them which are completely beyond their control.  It's easier for them to just scoff at a conspiracy theory and just lump it in with more far-fetched theories... and label believers as tin-hat nutballs.

A very sweeping statement there. Stereo typing city.



SirKenin -> RE: Conspiracy Theories, (tin hat or otherwise) (1/3/2007 10:36:45 AM)

Somebody just painted a marble with a 5" brush...  Not surprising they got paint on their fingers.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.320313E-02