The most intriguing conspiracy theory

Atavachron wrote: it's possible an experiment in radar concealment technology was mistaken for something more

It's almost certainly what happened. The natural secrecy of the experiment just led to confusion and speculation and it took off from there. Wonder why the conspiracy shifted the ships from the real even though.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Dean wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: Dean wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: The Philadelphia Experiment is another one for people to look into that I'm fond of. D'you mean there are people who believe that actually happened?!?!?!? It clearly did happen so yeah. Ah, I see. Or don't. I hope it's clear I'm being sarcastic.

That was my assumption, hence my "now you see it now you don't" joke.

rdtprog wrote: manofmystery wrote: I'm of the belief that the popularity of soccer is some sort of conspiracy.  Maybe something poured into the rest of the world's water/alcohol supply.  How else can you explain the popularity of spirited 0-0 or maybe 1-0 (high scoring) exercises in standing around in a field? Maybe it has something to do with religion or "brain washing"...

how can something that is a religion (to many people ) be a couse of religion, it can be a substitue for religios followimg, their even is some football deitys, Maradona, Pele, Puskas, Eggen and Ferguson (for some people)

aginor wrote: yeah i know we were affected by the MGP virus but now we have recoverd lets talk about hmmm are their any cool Norwegian conpiracys theories (I know their is some surrounding Arne Treholt but i will not go into that her )

Unfortunately there is.  Utoya is the latest.

I do not agree with that one being a conspiracy though.  I'm not that stupid.

Dean wrote: Atkingani wrote: Dean wrote: Perhaps, I guess it's Chinese whispers to get from radar-invisible to optically invisible to teleportation. Then stealth ships don't look like a standard WWII destroyer. Then, perhaps the USS Eldridge is really the USS Eldritch. Anyway, the events surrounding the suicide of Dr. Morris Jessup are weird.  That fuels a conspiracy theory, it doesn't prove one exists. You could say the events surrounding many suicides are weird - look at Alan Turing and the poisoned apple.

David Kelly was murdered.  He did not commit suicide.

So that's another case.

They're just idiots, Chris.

 best answer yet.

A bit of both, Henry.

If you're going to do an inside job, then why on earth would you make it obviously look like one?  You wouldn't.  You'd make it look impossible for people to discover whether there is a true conspiracy going on.  People would come up with theories but each and every theory would sound almost implausible (and they generally do sound implausible).  That does not mean there is not a conspiracy.  It just means the perpetrators have deliberately done it that way to avoid being found out.  Their mind-set would be "let's leave them lots of clues, some false, some true and see how what they come up with".

I've read a lot of different conspiracies about different events.  Many are stupid and implausible.  Yet they have still found flaws in the original story for them to come up with those ideas.  Some of what they say may have truth.  Some may not.

As an example: moon landing photography and shadows

That's just one issue.  One of the more popular ones.  Of course, many people say they were taken in a studio but if that was the case, it doesn't necessarily negate the fact they landed on the Moon.  It's just they may have experienced issues and needed to make fake photos afterwards.

Yet others will say it was because they never went there in the first place.

With 9/11 you have accounts of explosions in the ground floor of the Twin Towers, as well as the collapse of WTC7, which doesn't seem right, as barely any debris hit the building.  This suggests a controlled explosion.

How would this come about if it was terrorists?

Well, some say the terrorists could have somehow put explosives on the "empty" floors to allow the buildings to freefall.

Some say it was an inside-job by people who were not terrorists.  The Government, CIA, FBI or whoever.

When there's doubts in the official stories (and there is in many different incidents) then people will always think something dodgy is/was going on.  If these incidents were cut-and-dried, why would people need to question the official account?

Some people do just like to find silly holes in stories though.  I'll admit that.  Some major questions though have and will forever be asked by people who think something isn't as plain as people are lead to believe.



Dean, was that in reply to me?

James wrote: If you're going to do an inside job, then why on earth would you make it obviously look like one?  You wouldn't.  You'd make it look impossible for people to discover whether there is a true conspiracy going on.  People would come up with theories but each and every theory would sound almost implausible (and they generally do sound implausible).  That does not mean there is not a conspiracy.  It just means the perpetrators have deliberately done it that way to avoid being found out.  Their mind-set would be "let's leave them lots of clues, some false, some true and see how what they come up with".

....I don't even.

As an example: moon landing photography and shadows

There are no problems with the shadows in the moon photos.

With 9/11 you have accounts of explosions in the ground floor of the Twin Towers, as well as the collapse of WTC7, which doesn't seem right, as barely any debris hit the building.  This suggests a controlled explosion.

Fire, and no it doesn't to the people who actually know what they are talking about.

When there's doubts in the official stories (and there is in many different incidents) then people will always think something dodgy is/was going on.  If these incidents were cut-and-dried, why would people need to question the official account?

Because some people are f**king crazy.

Dean, was that in reply to me?

Yes, because that idea is hilarious if you think about it for more than 10 seconds.

James wrote: So 9 of us are crazy to have voted in this poll?  Thanks.

This poll says interesting, it is not a reflection of whether or not you actually believe it. But yes, I remember the thread we had ages ago and I know there are plenty of people on PA with profoundly irrational beliefs. Or less controversially, oliverstoned's beliefs on hifi. ;-)

Lots of people have found issues with shadows and reflections in the moon landing photos.  I'm not saying either way whether they are correct or not but people have their doubts.  So you don't see any issues.  That's fine.

I don't really find the fact that some people question things compelling or interesting?

Have you actually read anything about this?  I doubt you have.

*facepalm*