Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The most intriguing conspiracy theory
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe most intriguing conspiracy theory
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 19>
Poll Question: Choose the conspiracy theory that most interests you
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
5 [10.64%]
0 [0.00%]
6 [12.77%]
5 [10.64%]
16 [34.04%]
0 [0.00%]
1 [2.13%]
3 [6.38%]
3 [6.38%]
3 [6.38%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
3 [6.38%]
2 [4.26%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 12:21
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Ah, and of course: Scientology. Evil galactic emperor using tax collectors which fly people in giant B-52 shaped space ships to earth and into volcanos - and then later forcing those peoples' souls to watch movies ... Wacko
That's not a conspiracy theory.. that's mass lunacy... Tongue
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 12:20
Ah, and of course: Scientology. Evil galactic emperor using tax collectors which fly people in giant B-52 shaped space ships to earth and into volcanos - and then later forcing those peoples' souls to watch movies ... Wacko
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 12:19
None of those intrigues me, since I don't buy any of them. 9/11 is the only one which used to intrigue me for some time, so it gets my vote. 

Another nice one:

David Icke's theory of evil lizard people/aliens secretly ruling the world:
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 11:32
Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

Originally posted by James James wrote:


And no, I'd rather go with the official story than think Bigfoot was flying the 'planes. LOL


Hey, I would buy this last one. At least, it's more believable than the hypothesis of the Chupacabra doing it.

Yeah right, try to operate a plane with those big hands (which I guess accompany the big feet...) The Chupacabra theory is more plausible due to more maneuverability... 
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 11:05
Originally posted by James James wrote:


And no, I'd rather go with the official story than think Bigfoot was flying the 'planes. LOL


Hey, I would buy this last one. At least, it's more believable than the hypothesis of the Chupacabra doing it.
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 08:58
Originally posted by The T The T wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...
 
 
I understand that.  That particular article just broke the two possible reasons for all this nonsense so forcefully.
That particular article is quite good. I mean, it shows the stupidity behind the particular video and everything around it. I'm sure MoM wouldn't cite Cracked as an ultimate source of wisdom (nothing, not even peer-reviewed scientific articles are ultimate fountains of truth) but this particular one makes such a good point... 


Except the author is lying in regards to some of his answers.
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 08:56
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Originally posted by James James wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Saying because it would take a certain amount of explosives to demolish a building, in such a way, that a plane crash couldn't is a logical fallacy.

How so?  Please do explain. Wink

Ever hear of the expression: "comparing apples to oranges"


That didn't answer my question.  How can a 'plane (and I know there were supposed to be 2 but I dealing with both towers separately here) full of jet fuel hat hits a building of that scale (and 3/4 of the way up) be expected to be equal to that estimated figure for a controlled explosion?  A controlled explosion takes planning.  There was ample time for people to plan it all.  There were builders working in the building up to a week before and I'm sure even before that they had time to work on it.

If there was no controlled explosion, then a 'plane, that hits the building, is expected to cause a tower to collaspe into its own footprint in the same manner as a controlled explosion?  Not once but twice?  Plus a third building that wasn't even hit by  a 'plane (admittedly a lot smaller) and was only hit by debris, also happens to fall into its own footprint?  This is without barely any impact at all.

You'll say the fires caused it.

If that is the case, then won't down people who are in the demolition business set fire to their buildings?

You'll probably say that's a stupid comparison and also say because it's slower.

If it's slower, then how come fires supposedly brought down 3 different buildings within a couple of hours of the fires starting?

Experts is a subjective term.  In my opinion claiming, on youtube or elsewhere, that the buildings looked like they were bombed invalidates your expert status.

So basically you're calling bullsh*t on anyone with a differing opinion to your own?  Whoever they claim to be.  Hold on, that's a false negative.  I could easily say the same thing about people who are experts and post something on Youtube who claim that the buildings collapsed due the 'plane crashes and fires.  Because they claim this on Youtube, it therefore invalidates their opinion and their expert status.

It's the same argument you're making.

I said expert was a subjective term so it's not as though you caught me here.  I even said "in my opinion".

So you basically agreed with me then.  You're calling bullsh*t on it because you're "hard-hearded" and won't even think that anything untoward happened that day.  No doubts whatsoever.

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.



Oh and I never said they were bombed.  Do you not read properly?
 
The piece from the cracked article said "bombed".  I was responding to your response to that.

A controlled explosion is not being bombed.  It may consist of using bombs but they're not being dropped by 'planes. Wink
Anyway you want to word it, it didn't happen.  You might not agree with the video below but it makes a hell of a lot more sense than anything you've thrown out there.
 
Do his own research?  He was writing an analysis of existing information.

No.  He chose to pretty much steal information from sources that try to debunk the conspiracies.  He dismisses everything that supports conspiracies and doesn't even think before he types (sorry, copy and paste), otherwise he'd never have said what he did about there being not experts in demolition who disagree with the official story.  I suspect his source said the same thing and he just stole and it didn't fact check.



Have you ever written a paper for a class?  You don't pull information out of your ass.  You gather information, piece it together in your own voice for your audience, then cite your sources.  I suspect that he probably thinks as much of your experts as I do.

I have written many.  Yes.  If I'd have written that Cracked article, I'd have probably failed as I would have pretty much just stolen the information from a website.  Yes I may have re-worded it but it's not my own research.  Plus I'd also have failed for not being reasoned and taking the conspiracy side of the story seriously.

Oh and then openly admitting I stole the material from a website and forums as I close.  Oh that'd go down well with my assessor!


Here's a little video about debunking controlled demolition, while I'm here:
 
Oh, and Karl Pilkington is a friend of British comedian Ricky Gervais.  Ricky finds Karl's bizarre world view and willingness to believe anything he reads online to be hilarious and has put a lot of effort into trying to make him a household name.


Ah.  Ricky Gervais... urgh.  He's so up his own arse!  He used to be amusing but now he's just annoying.  He was born in the same town as my two older brothers too... oh well.
 
Ricky's funny but Karl is hilarious.  I've found this discussion far from funny and extremely close to tragic.  I'm all for skepticism, especially when it comes to government, but I just can't stand people yelling fire when there isn't even any smoke.  There is just no way in hell that 9/11 was a government conpiracy.  I'd swear that on my life.


There's plenty of fire without smoke.  Open your eyes to it.  How come so many people on this very poll have voted for 9/11?  I know they're not saying they believe it but they say it's the most likely.

So I'm not alone.  There's millions of us out there who don't believe the official story.  Many of us disagree and indeed argue with each other (not me, as I don't post on any conspiracy forums about it) but we alll agree that elements of the story simply don't hold up to scrutiny.

Anyway, with any conspiracy, you'll get debunkers.  That's the nature of a conspiracy.

In both cases you'll find that people choose to ignore evidence.  Again, that's the nature of both conspiracy theorists and debunkers of those conspiracies.

If tomorrow Bush or one of his cronies admitted it was an inside-job, what would you do?

Of course, that won't ever happen but I am curious as to how you'd react.

Edited by James - November 22 2011 at 08:57
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 08:35
It may make a good point but it doesn't mean it's correct.  Plus he really didn't do much research himself.  He said he'd get both sides of the story.  He just belittled the conspiracy side.  He didn't take any elements of it seriously.

And no, I'd rather go with the official story than think Bigfoot was flying the 'planes. LOL


Edited by James - November 22 2011 at 08:37
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 07:38
Originally posted by AtomicCrimsonRush AtomicCrimsonRush wrote:

Originally posted by zappaholic zappaholic wrote:





Michael Jackson Eating Popcorn GIF




Couldn't have said it better.
Back to Top
AtomicCrimsonRush View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 02 2008
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 14258 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 22 2011 at 06:53
Originally posted by zappaholic zappaholic wrote:





Michael Jackson Eating Popcorn GIF




Edited by AtomicCrimsonRush - November 22 2011 at 07:05
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 11:13
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...
 
 
I understand that.  That particular article just broke the two possible reasons for all this nonsense so forcefully.
That particular article is quite good. I mean, it shows the stupidity behind the particular video and everything around it. I'm sure MoM wouldn't cite Cracked as an ultimate source of wisdom (nothing, not even peer-reviewed scientific articles are ultimate fountains of truth) but this particular one makes such a good point... 
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 11:07
This is the best argument against the ridiculous 9/11 conspiracy theory: 

people that really hate the government are actually giving it a pass on this one.
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4335 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 10:08
Originally posted by James James wrote:

Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...
 
 
I understand that.  That particular article just broke the two possible reasons for all this nonsense so forcefully.


It actually made your viewpoint even less valid.  Sorry. LOL
 
 
That's because you are hard-headed and impossible to reason with.  I'm sure you'd rather believe Bigfoot were piloting the planes at the behest of the underground-mole-people then accept what actually happened.


Time always wins.
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 09:48
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...
 
 
I understand that.  That particular article just broke the two possible reasons for all this nonsense so forcefully.


It actually made your viewpoint even less valid.  Sorry. LOL
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 09:44
That BBC article only corrected one mistake.  It didn't even mention the other hijackers that have been shown to still be alive.

What?  The FBI has no influence on me whatsoever in regards to what I believe in relation to this.
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4335 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 08:48
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...
 
 
I understand that.  That particular article just broke the two possible reasons for all this nonsense so forcefully.


Time always wins.
Back to Top
Henry Plainview View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2008
Location: Declined
Status: Offline
Points: 16715 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 05:39
Originally posted by James James wrote:

That BBC link is hilarious.  It doesn't prove anything whatsover. LOL  It's rather a vague article and statement and you want me to seriously believe the FBI's word?

Or the BBC for that matter.

Because there's a big difference between the FBI f**king up and giving the wrong people initially and "the hijackers turning up alive". And their word is the only reason you have these insane beliefs to begin with...
if you own a sodastream i hate you
Back to Top
VanderGraafKommandöh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Malaria
Status: Offline
Points: 89372 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 05:37
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

Originally posted by James James wrote:


I believe also some of these hi-jackers have since been found alive.

No, you are completely misunderstanding the situation, can you stop saying crazy things without spending 15 seconds Googling them first. There are many more words if you want.

mom, cracked is not really a good source for you to be leaning so heavily on...


That BBC link is hilarious.  It doesn't prove anything whatsover. LOL  It's rather a vague article and statement and you want me to seriously believe the FBI's word?

Or the BBC for that matter.
Back to Top
Blacksword View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 05:04
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

has anyone mentioned 'Globalism' ?; not so much a conspiracy theory as an emerging reality some think of as conspiratorial, in fact I believe it is thought of mostly as a "conspiracy of the Left" rather than the garden variety Industrial-Military kind.   John Kennedy was considered by some to be an early Globalist, perhaps one of the things that made the Defense/Intelligence elite nervous.  


Globalism will be the undoing of the west, but I suspect that was not the original aim. It could be considered an inevitable conseqeunce of capitalism, or at least of the kind of crony capitalism by which we run the global economy.

What do you call a conspiracy thory that comes true? Is there a name for it?

The idea that the global banks run the show, and not the governments of sovereign nations is one popular CT. I'll not make any commnt on this, but just say two words: Greece and Italy. If people don't know what I mean by that, then watch the news, from a variety of different sources.
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Back to Top
Blacksword View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 21 2011 at 04:53
Originally posted by James James wrote:



It's Andy's turn now:I've watched Ripple Effect now.  It's all rather interesting, I must say.I do have a few issues with the presentation though.  The narrator (not sure if it's the same guy who researched it all and made the video but presume it is) concludes a lot of stuff but doesn't back a lot of it up with sources.  He says such-and-such said this but doesn't always show a clip, or a newspaper/online source.  So us as the viewer have to just assume he's correct.  I realise he probably wanted to fit it all into an hour but I did feel a bit like he'd rushed through it a bit.Secondly, he pretty much blatantly says that the mock terrorist threat that day turned into the real thing and thus then went onto presume all the non-terrorists didn't know they were involved in a real event and didn't show any proof of this.I still see much evidence of an inside-job though, I just feel his presentation could have been better.  I shall probably now end up looking into some of the stuff mentioned and try and find sources to back these things up.





The film maker calls himself 'Moadib' (sp?) which is a reference to to Frank Herberts Dune.

In a BBC documnetary he was tracked down to Northern Ireland, and questioned over his alleged links to a far right group, and anti Semitic literature. The BBC may have just been on a smear mission. I'm sure it wouldn;t have been the first time.

A number of the film makers claim have been de-bunked as far as I know, especially with regard to the timing of their journey into London, and the times the bombs went off.

What interests me most about 7/7 is not so much the specifics of the day, but the intel that was not share with the public inquiry. Specifically I'm interested in the link between th bombers and Haroon Rashid Aswat. You'll need to look this character up, if you're interested, but basuically the Telegraph reported, shortly after the attacks that he had been in touch with the bombers in the days and weeks before the attacks. swat had been arrested in the US in thelate 90's, in Seattle, charged with trying to set up a training camp in Oregon. The FBI caught up with him in Seattle but were 'ordered' by the CIA to release him, and send him back to Britain. Intelligence expert John Loftus believed swat to be a valuable MI6/Al Queada double agent, feeding valuable information to the UK government. The plot is very dark and complex, and I'm not going into it any further here, suffice to say there is plenty of information on the web about it, and much of that info is in the mainstream.
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 19>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.