Topic: It's a conspiraceh

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Yes.

How do you think it's all joined up then?

Who speaks to who since half of them seem to oppose the other half?

[So… Howard Philips]

How do you think it's all joined up then?

Who speaks to who since half of them seem to oppose the other half?

There's two separate conspiracies, one run by the reptilians and the other by the space aliens who built the pyramids?

[RainbowFlick]

The problem is that 99.9% of people ae not experts in the science of the conspiracy in question. Could plans bring down the twin towers and building 7? What about the bullet that killed JFK? What about 5g? Climate change a hoax?
I’m an expert in none of the above. All I can do is read as much as I can (if I’m interested) and see if I can make sense of it. There are some scientists who question climate change. They are more qualified than me so who am I to totally dismiss them?
I’m not saying I particularly have an opinion (before the insults start) but when Im left with the official story coming from the mouths of known liars and people that genuinely don’t give a shit, then I think it’s natural to question things.

What? The majority of scientists, nurses and doctors are all saying the same thing GLOBALLY. These aren't government agents or whatever you want to believe. They are literally trained experts but people choose to ignore them because of their distrust of government and belief some shouting conspiracy theorist with a sexy new theory is the 'truth'. Why can't these people question actual real things - like shady Tory covid contracts or the delayed lockdown? Because they choose not to, because it's not as grand and sexy as they want.

There is so much evidence against the theories around 5G, mask-wearing, vaccines from experts yet people choose to still believe them.

It sounds like you are somewhere down the rabbit hole but unable to admit it.

[ljycb]

There will always be people seeking the truth when they don’t accept what they have been told. There is nothing wrong with that as long as it’s not fuelled by anger and hatred.
And we all know that governments lie from time to time so to not believe them or to question their trust is normal.

Especially when the world leaders are utter morons atm.

My theory is that everything is questionable. I can accept Boris and his scientist as gospel. I could choose to believe putin and his advisors instead. I could even opt for trump. Perhaps the media is not biased as well. Who knows. But they have lied before. They have deceived before.

Each to their own.

You’re right in that we should always look to seek the truth - the problem I have is that too many people think “the truth” is some poorly-cropped alt-right meme that’s been shared on their Facebook feed.

[Sheer Magnetism]

I actually agree with Kesey to some extent because I've suspected for years that extreme opinions on both sides of the political divide have been signal boosted by bots in order to heighten division, though I also believe it's probably being engineered from abroad since it fits in so well with Putin's internal strategy in Russia.

As far as general conspiracies go, I always look at what makes sense. The idea that 5G mobile signals could cause people to catch a virus seems insane to me and I think that opinion deserves to be ridiculed. Similarly, people who equate ordinary fire with jet fuel are going by a straightforward logical fallacy that can be easily debunked (also, how could all that prep have been done on the 9/11 buildings for weeks without anything getting out or anyone noticing?).

[FilthyBloke]

I actually agree with Kesey to some extent because I've suspected for years that extreme opinions on both sides of the political divide have been signal boosted by bots in order to heighten division, though I also believe it's probably being engineered from abroad since it fits in so well with Putin's internal strategy in Russia.

As far as general conspiracies go, I always look at what makes sense. The idea that 5G mobile signals could cause people to catch a virus seems insane to me and I think that opinion deserves to be ridiculed. Similarly, people who equate ordinary fire with jet fuel are going by a straightforward logical fallacy that can be easily debunked (also, how could all that prep have been done on the 9/11 buildings for weeks without anything getting out or anyone noticing?).

I dunno, Iv seen and read a lot of stuff on 9/11 that suggests the official story is just not plausible. And these opinions also come from engineers and scientists. Personally I don’t think we will ever know the full truth. I remember watching it unfold. A horrible day. But to accept any government investigation into something some people think they are responsible for is like trying to find out if god is real but only asking a priest.
As for 5g, I don’t even know how phone calls work. I’m an expert in very little. So I try not to ridicule anyone who has more understanding and has given more time to research than I have.

[oldfordie]

I dunno, Iv seen and read a lot of stuff on 9/11 that suggests the official story is just not plausible. And these opinions also come from engineers and scientists. Personally I don’t think we will ever know the full truth. I remember watching it unfold. A horrible day. But to accept any government investigation into something some people think they are responsible for is like trying to find out if god is real but only asking a priest.
As for 5g, I don’t even know how phone calls work. I’m an expert in very little. So I try not to ridicule anyone who has more understanding and has given more time to research than I have.

Ive read a lot of stuff like many other people and am sure many of the defence security set ups in all the defence departments cocked up badly, it allowed the terrorists to go undetected until they committed the hijackings, the CT use this as a argument to say the USA government were complicit in the attack on the twin towers which is absurd, the security has been completely updated now, departments talk to each other now rather than keeping important security information to themselves in the hope of getting the glory of catching terrorists.

[stoa]

And these opinions also come from engineers and scientists.

As for 5g, I don’t even know how phone calls work. I’m an expert in very little. So I try not to ridicule anyone who has more understanding and has given more time to research than I have.

So what? People who have degrees or are experts in a certain field can still be crackpots, idiots or just con men. Donald Trump has a bachelor's degree in economics, but he seems to know very little about how the economy actually works. Just because some engineer doesn't believe that the Twin Towers were hit by planes but that they were blown up with bombs or whatever, doesn't mean he's right. I've not yet seen a conspiracy theory about 9/11 that hasn't been debunked in some way or another.

[McrRed]

On 9/11 the only experts Ive seen are the ones that believe something is wrong with the official story. Has anyone got any links to a good debunk of the various theories?

I find it interesting that certain (terrorist) events are more or less uncontroversial but that others pick up a huge amount of discussion and argument.

[Alan_X]

The problem is that 99.9% of people are not experts in the science of the conspiracy in question.

Exactly, and that's why it's important not to jump onto theories peddled by people who are also not experts in the relevant field. And generally, as a starting point,  it's safe to assume that a single outlying opinion is less likely to be valid than the scientific concensus.

Most grand conspiracy theories are attempts to give a simple big explanation to complicated big events. Events like the WTC attack and the Kennedy assassination feel like they must have larger explanation than 19 terrorists or a single shooter.

Could plans bring down the twin towers and building 7?

Yes they could and it's been explained in detail how it happened. The alternative theories have all been debiunked and the 'experts' pushing the various conspiracy theories are invariably qualified in an unrelated field.

What about the bullet that killed JFK?

As above, the 'magic bullet', 'back and to the left' and 'the grassy knoll' have all been dealt with by the evidence and subsequent explanations. JFK the movie has a lot to answer.

What about 5g?

What about 5g? It's the same as 4g and 3g - a sectio of teh elctromagnetic spectrum:



That's all it is - a slightly higher frequency than the current 4g band.

Climate change a hoax?

No - the scientific concensus is cear that climate change is happening and is a result of human action. As you say, there are a few scientists who question climate change but many of them are not climatologists. Apart from anything else, the effects of climate change are with us and are only going to get worse. Maybe should also take account of the fact that climate change hoax stories are actively generated and pushed by oil companies and far-right-wing organisations. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's an actually conspiracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/21/william-happer-trump-white-house-climate-crisis

I’m an expert in none of the above. All I can do is read as much as I can (if I’m interested) and see if I can make sense of it. There are some scientists who question climate change. They are more qualified than me so who am I to totally dismiss them?

See above about climate change.

I’m not saying I particularly have an opinion (before the insults start) but when Im left with the official story coming from the mouths of known liars and people that genuinely don’t give a shit, then I think it’s natural to question things.

I'd recommend separating 'the official story' from 'scientific concensus'. They are two different things. The 'official story' of the WTC attacks was put together by a host of independent experts and has been checked by hundreds, possibly thousands of subsequet fact checkers and follow-up investigations. The conspiracy theories (of which there are many) have all been addressed and debunked.

And if you're concerned about stories coming out of the mouths of liars, I'd suggest you take a good look the sources of the conspiracy theories. There isn't one source and the motives range from the genuinely inquistive to the malign.

Moon landing hoax believers could be considered harmless in that it's irrelevant what they believe happened - man did go to the Moon - but persuading people it didn't adds to the 'they're all liars' mantra. And like the 'where's the plane' nonsense at the Pentagon, the 'where are all the stars' question seems initially convincing despite being completely wrong and explainable.

The first point of call is the science and good quality documentary evidence. get you information from bodies and organisatons that have codes of conduct  can be held to account.

Remember that social media is now a prime target for right-wing disinformation and for Russian bot farms. if you're interested in conspiracy theories and getting your information from a Facebook group it's highly likely that Facebook's algorithm is pushing you information that reinforces those views. Twitter is more self-selected but the tendency is still to find yourself getting into a bubble. Web searches will tend to do the same.

Be skeptical, that doesn't mean being cynical. There are some really good podcasts about critical thionking and skepticism. The best is probably Skeptics Guide to the Universe.

https://www.theskepticsguide.org/

And as a general point - just look at who has most to gain and who has already gained from the promotion of conspiracy theories: Trump, Johnson and Cummings, Frottage, Bolsonaro, Putin and many others throughout history. Johnson spent decades spreading lies about Europe. Trump and his allies have embraced QAnon.

[Alan_X]

On 9/11 the only experts Ive seen are the ones that believe something is wrong with the official story. Has anyone got any links to a good debunk of the various theories?

I find it interesting that certain (terrorist) events are more or less uncontroversial but that others pick up a huge amount of discussion and argument.

I've debunked most of them on here in the past before I gave up.

From the previous threads:

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=142268.msg2262763#msg2262763

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=166037.msg2706442#msg2706442

Here's my summary of the 9-11 conspiracy:

*takes deep breath*

From the people who brought you The Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Hurricane Katrina, The War on Terror and the Space Shuttle, the masters of problem-free operations... the US Government....

....so here's the pitch, the US government essentially fabricated an entire terrorist cell, organised the largest demolition project ever seen - live on TV -  (including the first use of Thermite in the controlled implosion of a building), arranged for two planes to be flown by "patsies" or remote control (take our pick) directly at the point where the demolition charges had been set (at 500mph!) without damaging the pre-set explosives, in some variations they also fire missiles from "pods" less than 1/100th of a second before striking the building... the demolition experts have arranged for the buildingh to collapse 40 minutes or so after the impacts and presumably set incendiaries to give the impression of massive fires in the impact zone... 200 or so volunteers? are employed to throw themselves out of the upper floors (remember there is no intense heat) while the Thermite charges cut through the steel... another building in the complex is also set for demolition... because it contains CIA files or something... Meanwhile, to the south a jet that took off earlier in the day disappears with all it's passengers and is never seen again.. it is replaced by a cruise missile (fired from what or where we aren't told) or possibly a Global Hawk drone, that enters the Pentagon from the side exploding in a way that causes damage exactly analogous to a plane hitting it at speed. A team of stooges then scatters pre-prepared "wreckage" from an American Airlines plane on the lawn and in the wrecked building together with bodies containing DNA of the "disappeared" passengers... a team of video specialists have prepared a "security camera" sequence showing the "plane" hit the building but for some reason do a shit job and fail to make it clear enough... and then there's Flight 93... let's re-cap... the planes that hit the towers were planes - I think everyone agrees and they were meant to be seen to hit the towers (either by Bin Laden or the US Government depending on your point of view), the Pentagon "plane" (speech marks for the benefit of our CT friends) was also meant to hit its target (again either on Bin Laden or Bush's instructions)... surely fl 93 should have hit another target to make the case for war absolute... I mean if "they" don't care about democracy and the due process fo Government and are willing to kill thousands... why not hit Washington... the heart of "Freedom and Democracy"?.. come on boys think it through... what could possibly be more dramatic than that - I mean it worked for Will Smith!... so what are we meant to make of 93?... ah yes!... let's make it fit... it was shot down... yeah that's right shot down to err.. prevent it from hitting.....no wait we want it to hit.... hmmm...  no what we need is a story of American resistance... so let's see... we'll have it take off late... so that the "passengers" can hear about the WTC and revolt against the "hijackers" (remember the planes are being flown by patsies or by remote control so no real hijackers are on board) actually if there are no hijackers there can't be any passengers...  OK yup... sorry I'm having difficulty with this one... ok a pre-recorded flight recorder and a load of corpses with matching DNA to the "passenger" list are loaded onto a plane which is then auto-piloted to a point in the middle of nowhere... and shot down by a fighter... (why not just put a bomb on board or pilot it into the ground boss?)  and err... there you have it...

Thanks must go to the cast of thousands who were complicit in the preparation and execution of this atrocity and their continued silence five years later. Thanks especially to the Fire and Police chiefs who must have been in on it but were happy to sacrifice their men for the sake of a neo-con war in the middle-east. And thanks of course to you... the audience for watching the whole show and actually believing what you saw was real...

You're right it all makes sense now... 

See if you take away the moody music and the stupid questions like "how did it fall at "near" free-fall speed (because it was in free-fall you idiots...), what were the "squibs"... "how could 19 men with box-cutters kill so many"... "why weren't the planes shot down?''  etc  what you are left with is a scenario that is so far fetched...  (and remember the main premise of all of these theories is that the official line is far-fetched) only the most gullible or simple minded would accept it....

...or people with a pre-disposition to assume everything government does is evil...

As others have said the real horror is what's happening now and has been happening for years around the world. Theses idiots make a mockery of investigation and truth and damage the case of everyone who is trying to fight against real evil.

*edit* Eric, on your point about whether they might have known... of course it's possible and there are clearly some in the Bush team that would allow such an act to occur for their own ends. 3,000 is probably an acceptable level of casualties for some, let's face it even millions of deaths aren't a deterrent to ideologues and commercial self-interest. But even if that were the case, the evidence for it being a terrorist attack is pretty clear if you examine the evidence with an open mind, and the alternative is simply not supported by the "evidence" that the Conspiracy Theorists put forward.

None of the 'experts' put forward were actually experts in the field they were pushing. Richard Gage is an architect but clearly has no expertise in the construction of the buildings in question or the very specific science of building collapse. Steven Jones, the idiot who promoted thermite had no expertise in controlled demolition. His crackpot theories had no relation to his actual expertise in muon-catalyzed fusion. And so on.

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2011/07/the-911-truth-movement-the-top-conspiracy-theory-a-decade-later/

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/

https://www.machinedesign.com/home/article/21830429/another-blow-for-wtc-conspiracy-theorists

[FilthyBloke]

What? The majority of scientists, nurses and doctors are all saying the same thing GLOBALLY. These aren't government agents or whatever you want to believe. They are literally trained experts but people choose to ignore them because of their distrust of government and belief some shouting conspiracy theorist with a sexy new theory is the 'truth'. Why can't these people question actual real things - like shady Tory covid contracts or the delayed lockdown? Because they choose not to, because it's not as grand and sexy as they want.

There is so much evidence against the theories around 5G, mask-wearing, vaccines from experts yet people choose to still believe them.

It sounds like you are somewhere down the rabbit hole but unable to admit it.

Maybe I am. Maybe the whole thing blows my mind. So much information that I don’t really understand. Maybe the fact I don’t take things I don’t understand as ‘fact’ is why I like to question. I haven’t once stated what I believe in here so I’d calm down a bit if I were you.
My point was that I was trying to explain why some people may question the official story.

[FilthyBloke]

Exactly, and that's why it's important not to jump onto theories peddled by people who are also not experts in the relevant field. And generally, as a starting point,  it's safe to assume that a single outlying opinion is less likely to be valid than the scientific concensus.

Most grand conspiracy theories are attempts to give a simple big explanation to complicated big events. Events like the WTC attack and the Kennedy assassination feel like they must have larger explanation than 19 terrorists or a single shooter.
 Yes they could and it's been explained in detail how it happened. The alternative theories have all been debiunked and the 'experts' pushing the various conspiracy theories are invariably qualified in an unrelated field.
 As above, the 'magic bullet', 'back and to the left' and 'the grassy knoll' have all been dealt with by the evidence and subsequent explanations. JFK the movie has a lot to answer.
 What about 5g? It's the same as 4g and 3g - a sectio of teh elctromagnetic spectrum:



That's all it is - a slightly higher frequency than the current 4g band.
 No - the scientific concensus is cear that climate change is happening and is a result of human action. As you say, there are a few scientists who question climate change but many of them are not climatologists. Apart from anything else, the effects of climate change are with us and are only going to get worse. Maybe should also take account of the fact that climate change hoax stories are actively generated and pushed by oil companies and far-right-wing organisations. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's an actually conspiracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/21/william-happer-trump-white-house-climate-crisis

See above about climate change.

I'd recommend separating 'the official story' from 'scientific concensus'. They are two different things. The 'official story' of the WTC attacks was put together by a host of independent experts and has been checked by hundreds, possibly thousands of subsequet fact checkers and follow-up investigations. The conspiracy theories (of which there are many) have all been addressed and debunked.

And if you're concerned about stories coming out of the mouths of liars, I'd suggest you take a good look the sources of the conspiracy theories. There isn't one source and the motives range from the genuinely inquistive to the malign.

Moon landing hoax believers could be considered harmless in that it's irrelevant what they believe happened - man did go to the Moon - but persuading people it didn't adds to the 'they're all liars' mantra. And like the 'where's the plane' nonsense at the Pentagon, the 'where are all the stars' question seems initially convincing despite being completely wrong and explainable.

The first point of call is the science and good quality documentary evidence. get you information from bodies and organisatons that have codes of conduct  can be held to account.

Remember that social media is now a prime target for right-wing disinformation and for Russian bot farms. if you're interested in conspiracy theories and getting your information from a Facebook group it's highly likely that Facebook's algorithm is pushing you information that reinforces those views. Twitter is more self-selected but the tendency is still to find yourself getting into a bubble. Web searches will tend to do the same.

Be skeptical, that doesn't mean being cynical. There are some really good podcasts about critical thionking and skepticism. The best is probably Skeptics Guide to the Universe.

https://www.theskepticsguide.org/

And as a general point - just look at who has most to gain and who has already gained from the promotion of conspiracy theories: Trump, Johnson and Cummings,Frottage, Bolsonaro, Putin and many others throughout history. Johnson spent decades spreading lies about Europe. Trump and his allies have embraced QAnon.

Thanks for all that.
Informative and not condescending to read.

Food for thought.

[McrRed]

I've debunked most of them on here in the past before I gave up.


None of the 'experts' put forward were actually experts in the field they were pushing. Richard Gage is an architect but clearly has no expertise in the construction of the buildings in question or the very specific science of building collapse. Steven Jones, the idiot who promoted thermite had no expertise in controlled demolition. His crackpot theories had no relation to his actual expertise in muon-catalyzed fusion. And so on.

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2011/07/the-911-truth-movement-the-top-conspiracy-theory-a-decade-later/

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/

https://www.machinedesign.com/home/article/21830429/another-blow-for-wtc-conspiracy-theorists

Thanks Alan for taking the time. I'm off for a good read.

You know I'm a conspiracy theorist. I believe that official explanations for some events do not ring true regardless of the experts wheeled out to endorse them. Finding expert opinion that is not either bought or innocently erroneous is harder than you'd think.

Back in a bit [emoji2]


https://www.machinedesign.com/home/article/21830429/another-blow-for-wtc-conspiracy-theorists

This was undermined somewhat by this refutation in the comments:

https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf


I was somewhat unimpressed with the various disproofs in this one:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/

I was looking forward to the debunking of the shear forces on the columns and the so-called eyewitness accounts of firefighters at the scene who said they heard controlled explosions at the time of the puffs of debris...

Brb
And this one does a better job:

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2011/07/the-911-truth-movement-the-top-conspiracy-theory-a-decade-later/

But still far from conclusive with a fair bit of whatabouterry and cherry picked arguments.

Ive seen footage of explosions without the plane and then superimposed but Ive also seen pictures of Hitler doing the macarena. Video evidence is far from conclusive in these days of the deep fake. Governments and agencies have every reason to lie and cover up (or at least they did pre-2020!)
For the time being, I still think it's healthiest to keep an open mind. Thanks to all the contributors here, especially Alan for trying to address the actual issues. Here's to truth - it may take a while though.

[Jiminy Cricket]

https://www.machinedesign.com/home/article/21830429/another-blow-for-wtc-conspiracy-theorists

This was undermined somewhat by this refutation in the comments:

https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf

Without trying to dig into the two reports, just to point out that your second link predates the send by nearly 3.5 years. So, I am not sure how it is supposed to refute a report published 3.5 years later.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

 As above, the 'magic bullet', 'back and to the left' and 'the grassy knoll' have all been dealt with by the evidence and subsequent explanations. JFK the movie has a lot to answer.

Got any links to that evidence.

JFK is a great movie by the way.

And just for a laugh


<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/jZq6UOiBu_Y" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/jZq6UOiBu_Y</a>

[Lusty]

What about 5g? It's the same as 4g and 3g - a sectio of teh elctromagnetic spectrum:



That's all it is - a slightly higher frequency than the current 4g band.

Just on 5G, it's worth noting that most of the spectrum used for it has been in use for years for other purposes, and has just been freed up by OFCOM.  I think some of it was used for freeview before, and a lot of it was used by the MoD.  So if 5G caused coronavirus we'd have all got it off our TVs years ago.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Just on 5G, it's worth noting that most of the spectrum used for it has been in use for years for other purposes, and has just been freed up by OFCOM.  I think some of it was used for freeview before, and a lot of it was used by the MoD.  So if 5G caused coronavirus we'd have all got it off our TVs years ago.

Similar frequencies used in all modern home routers and laptops too.

Note: 5G =/= 5Ghz - they just happen to operate at (broadly speaking) similar frequencies. 5G = 5th Generation; 5GHz = 5 Gigahertz.

[Durlmints]

Just on 5G, it's worth noting that most of the spectrum used for it has been in use for years for other purposes, and has just been freed up by OFCOM.  I think some of it was used for freeview before, and a lot of it was used by the MoD.  So if 5G caused coronavirus we'd have all got it off our TVs years ago.

Television has indeed been broadcasting viruses in to our homes for years. One of the most insidious and disgusting of these is called Danny Mills.

[Fortneef]

The problem with keeping a wide open mind is someone may come and fill it with shit.

[rafathegaffa83]

When education systems fail, conspiracy theorists find their easy prey

Almost two-thirds of young American adults do not know that 6 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust, and more than one in 10 believe Jews caused the Holocaust, a new survey has found, revealing shocking levels of ignorance about the greatest crime of the 20th century.

Almost a quarter of respondents (23%) said they believed the Holocaust was a myth, or had been exaggerated, or they weren’t sure.

[...]

Eleven per cent of respondents across the US believed that Jews had caused the Holocaust, with the proportion in New York state at 19%, followed by 16% in Louisiana, Tennessee and Montana, and 15% in Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Nevada and New Mexico.

[...]

Seven out of 10 said it was not acceptable for an individual to hold neo-Nazi views.
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/16/holocaust-us-adults-study?

[oldfordie]

Got any links to that evidence.

JFK is a great movie by the way.

And just for a laugh


<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/jZq6UOiBu_Y" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/jZq6UOiBu_Y</a>

Whats Hicks on about, there's lots of unanswered questions but I don't know why Hicks is saying theres no way the shot could have been fired from that window, it was a easy shot.

[didi shamone]

Whats Hicks on about, there's lots of unanswered questions but I don't know why Hicks is saying theres no way the shot could have been fired from that window, it was a easy shot.

He's taking the piss.

[Alan_X]

He's taking the piss.

He wasn't. Sadly, much as I loved Bill Hicks, he bought into the JFK conspiracy.

[didi shamone]

He wasn't. Sadly, much as I loved Bill Hicks, he bought into the JFK conspiracy.

Really?   Wow, although maybe seen through the prism of what info was available then it was more plausible.
Seems like no one famous can die from the obvious cause, or indeed die at all in some cases.

[Alan_X]

Thanks Alan for taking the time. I'm off for a good read.

You know I'm a conspiracy theorist. I believe that official explanations for some events do not ring true regardless of the experts wheeled out to endorse them. Finding expert opinion that is not either bought or innocently erroneous is harder than you'd think.

Back in a bit [emoji2]


https://www.machinedesign.com/home/article/21830429/another-blow-for-wtc-conspiracy-theorists

This was undermined somewhat by this refutation in the comments:

https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf

I'll come back to the others but the discussion of whether microscopic chips are thermite is entirely irrelevant as there has never been a credible methodology proposed to explain how thermite would be used for controlled demolition of an occupied building. Thermite is not a high explosive and would be of no use in controlled demolition. Making up an imaginary type of thermite is not an answer.

As previously pointed out, none of the authors is an expert in the controlled demolition of buildings. Their main shared expertise appears to be in bvelievig abd promoting conspiracy theories.

As an aside, the phrase 'near free-fall speed' is one of the stupidest things the CTs refer to. Everything falls at free-fall speed when it's in free fall including parts of buildings when they collapse.

[So… Howard Philips]

I'll come back to the others but the discussion of whether microscopic chips are thermite is entirely irrelevant as there has never been a credible methodology proposed to explain how thermite would be used for controlled demolition of an occupied building. Thermite is not a high explosive and would be of no use in controlled demolition. Making up an imaginary type of thermite is not an answer.

As previously pointed out, none of the authors is an expert in the controlled demolition of buildings. Their main shared expertise appears to be in bvelievig abd promoting conspiracy theories.

As an aside, the phrase 'near free-fall speed' is one of the stupidest things the CTs refer to. Everything falls at free-fall speed when it's in free fall including parts of buildings when they collapse.

Is that CT speak for the force of gravity by any chance?

They seem to create their own language and terminology to foster as sense of belonging for their adherents - much as religious organisations have for millenia.

[idontknow]

Whats Hicks on about, there's lots of unanswered questions but I don't know why Hicks is saying theres no way the shot could have been fired from that window, it was a easy shot.

I like conspiracy theories.
My problem is the necessary competence, efficiency, purposeful action, secrecy etc never seem apparent when I have to deal with an official department. Maybe they hold back for 'the big ones', but I admit I have my doubts.

What I take from the JFK killing is that there were a lot of 'bad guys in Dallas when it happened. Now, to my thinking, if you are a 'bad guy' in town when 'something big' goes down, you definitely need to be 'in the know'. Otherwise, obviously, you are not a very big 'big guy', especially if you have a 'big guy mate who has already been picked up by the 'Feds' but 'told them he didn't know anything.' Well, he would say that, wouldn't know, so clearly he does know something.So you have to say, Yeah, they're pulling in the small fish first. That's what I heard. (That last bits a great add-on too, proves you are ITK on it's own, almost. And actually, hey, remember that package you delivered to Big Sal last week. So ok, you picked it up from the cake-shop, and when you to Big Sal and there were lots of kids splashing about in the swimming-pool, and he said, ta, it's his daughter's birthday? Well, you know,that's a great cover, isn't it? I mean, you're gonna shoot the President, it's obvious you hide the rifle in a cake-box, isn't it? Isn't it.

Anyway, that's the way my dad always told it. But maybe they called him The Grassy Knoll Man for some other reason - and that's what I would call unlikely.

[Nobby Reserve]

I'm not normally interested in conspiracy theories but one about the moon landings came on last night when I was sprawled on the settee and the remote was on the other side of the room so I ended up watching bits of it between being on my phone. It had 3 people with science backgrounds on it who were addressing the various aspects to the overall CT in turn. I wasn't taking much notice at the start but I think one was ex-NASA, one a CT'er and someone else whose details I missed.

One part I paid more attention to was the Van Allen Belt - two bands of radiation around the Earth. The CT'er was explaining how the levels of radiation would fry a person's DNA (and gave lots of impressive sounding 'facts' about it), unless the craft was coated in a foot of lead, which would make it unfeasibly heavy. It all sounded very plausible and genuine.

The NASA guy was skeptical but the other guy accepted the scientific explanation. They then went to an expert on radiation to do a scale mock-up, and it proved that even just the 3" thick steel-aluminium construction of the pod would filter out almost all the radiation to harmless levels (given the relatively short time they would be within the Belt), indeed just a perspex dome would have made the levels inside barely more than taking a few x-rays.


WRT 9/11, I think the CT's are pretty sick. But the NeoCon regime at the time didn't help quell CT fire by using 9/11 to justify their military action in the ME, including the lies about Iraq being involved.

The only CT I give any credence to is the Kennedy assassination, as there's so many elements of the official version that really don't add up.

[oldfordie]

I like conspiracy theories.
My problem is the necessary competence, efficiency, purposeful action, secrecy etc never seem apparent when I have to deal with an official department. Maybe they hold back for 'the big ones', but I admit I have my doubts.

What I take from the JFK killing is that there were a lot of 'bad guys in Dallas when it happened. Now, to my thinking, if you are a 'bad guy' in town when 'something big' goes down, you definitely need to be 'in the know'. Otherwise, obviously, you are not a very big 'big guy', especially if you have a 'big guy mate who has already been picked up by the 'Feds' but 'told them he didn't know anything.' Well, he would say that, wouldn't know, so clearly he does know something.So you have to say, Yeah, they're pulling in the small fish first. That's what I heard. (That last bits a great add-on too, proves you are ITK on it's own, almost. And actually, hey, remember that package you delivered to Big Sal last week. So ok, you picked it up from the cake-shop, and when you to Big Sal and there were lots of kids splashing about in the swimming-pool, and he said, ta, it's his daughter's birthday? Well, you know,that's a great cover, isn't it? I mean, you're gonna shoot the President, it's obvious you hide the rifle in a cake-box, isn't it? Isn't it.

Anyway, that's the way my dad always told it. But maybe they called him The Grassy Knoll Man for some other reason - and that's what I would call unlikely.

I hate many Conspiracy theories. they cause a lot of damage, people are getting threatened by idiots who think 5g is dangerous. climate change deniers are making it harder for the world to fight climate change. vaccine+covid conspiracy theories point the finger of blame at people who are genuinely trying to make this world a better place which turns people into hating people like Bill Gates.
So they are not a bit of harmless fun, they do tremendous damage as people cheer the bad guys like Trump and vilify the decent.
WTC, The planes and the Towers have all been covered but what rarely gets mentioned is why the government wasn't complicit in the attack, how people claim they had information of a terrosit attack but allowed it to happen, take away that argument and all the other stuff about a plane couldn't bring down a tower, the government planted explosives etc becomes irrelevant as you would have to prove the government knew the towers were going to be attacked, am surprised as Bush explained what happened in one of his speeches, lots of different departments had snippets of information on terrorists in the USA, they all kept this information to themselves in the hope of getting the glory of catching a terrorist. if they had all worked together and shared this information then those terrorists may have been caught before they acted, heads rolled after 9/11 and the whole system changed, the CT argue they had lots of information on a Terrorist attack and did nothing. that implies the government were complicit, that leads to the government planting bombs in the towers, it's all boll..
JFK shooting has a lot of unanswered questions and the authorities didn't look too deeply into what happened, so no problem with all the speculation but Hicks wasn't making a good point in the video, there are plenty of visual videos showing just how easy the shot would have been.
Moon Landing stuff and a few others are harmless as far as I can tell but I do wonder why people who argue some of these CTs aren't embarrassed by the arguments they make, they ignore a mountain of factual evidence and focus on something trivial as if they think they are making a valid argument.
You can present a mountain of proof on many points and you get a answer of well this fella (who turns out to be a crank ) thinks this happened so I don't really know what to believe, am confused.

[Alan_X]

I'm not normally interested in conspiracy theories but one about the moon landings came on last night when I was sprawled on the settee and the remote was on the other side of the room so I ended up watching bits of it between being on my phone. It had 3 people with science backgrounds on it who were addressing the various aspects to the overall CT in turn. I wasn't taking much notice at the start but I think one was ex-NASA, one a CT'er and someone else whose details I missed.

One part I paid more attention to was the Van Allen Belt - two bands of radiation around the Earth. The CT'er was explaining how the levels of radiation would fry a person's DNA (and gave lots of impressive sounding 'facts' about it), unless the craft was coated in a foot of lead, which would make it unfeasibly heavy. It all sounded very plausible and genuine.

They were aware of the Van Allen belts and did a load of work on it before and after. This paper gives all the detail you should need:

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/tnD7080RadProtect.pdf

As I've said before on here, the sheer scale of the documents, records, audio recordings, transcripts amd photographs is astonishing.

[Alan_X]

The only CT I give any credence to is the Kennedy assassination, as there's so many elements of the official version that really don't add up.

I'd be interested to know which elements you think don't add up. I think I know all of the conspiracy theories circulating about the Kennedy assassination and all have been addressed.

[Nobby Reserve]

They were aware of the Van Allen belts and did a load of work on it before and after. This paper gives all the detail you should need:

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/tnD7080RadProtect.pdf

As I've said before on here, the sheer scale of the documents, records, audio recordings, transcripts amd photographs is astonishing.

Yeah, they visited someone from NASA who'd been part of the team and they confirmed that, whilst the exact levels of radiation were a bit of a step into the dark, they were confident they wouldn't be a massive issue.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

I think I know all of the conspiracy theories circulating about the Kennedy assassination and all have been addressed.

I'd like to see the explanations.

[Nobby Reserve]

I'd be interested to know which elements you think don't add up. I think I know all of the conspiracy theories circulating about the Kennedy assassination and all have been addressed.

See, I've waded into the last page of this thread (because I'd watched that thing last night) so not read if the JFK theories have been addressed.

Without looking back, and very much off the top of my head (so appreciate I could be strolling merrily into a trap):

It's extremely unlikely LHO could have got 3 rounds off in such a short (5 seconds?) span with such accuracy.

Multiple witnesses recall 4 or more shots

The grassy knoll

The magic bullet

Ruby's intervention afterwards

[Sheer Magnetism]

The thing is, it's silly to dismiss conspiracy theories en masse because several have turned out to be true. The CIA running cocaine in order to fund anti-Sandinista activities in Nicaragua was considered a conspiracy theory for years even after the Iran-Contra affair. The idea the USA lied to provoke the Gulf of Tonkin incident and trigger the Vietnam War was regarded as a conspiracy theory before it was proven accurate by the Pentagon Papers. Same with the notion that Kissinger and Nixon purposely torpedoed peace talks in '68 to harm Hubert Humphrey's presidential campaign.

As far as the JFK assassination goes, there are several things that cast doubt on the idea Oswald was a lone shooter:

1) His rifle had an unreliable telescopic sight and the model was prone to jamming. Oswald's shooting ability had also deteriorated from what it was when he was first tested in the marines. That, combined with the fact the motorcade was moving away from him, the oak tree that blocked part of the route (though not the impact zone) and the high pressure situation, made it unlikely he could get off two shots that precise in so little time.

2) Several eyewitnesses reported shots coming from the grassy knoll. There have been claims by people who analysed the Zapruder and Nix films (including Nix himself) that the official versions have frames missing or have been tampered with, though that could be simply a result of their minds playing tricks on them.

3) Oswald had refused to confess and claimed he was just a patsy, before being murdered by Jack Ruby before he could get to court. Ruby had connections to organised crime in New Orleans, and the mob and the CIA had already worked together to try and kill Castro. Elements of both strongly resented Kennedy and the CIA was completely out of control in general by this point. Ruby was reportedly desperate to get in touch with the Warren Commission before he died and had told his psychiatrist it was a conspiracy, though as far as I'm aware there's no firm evidence of that.

4) The autopsy was rushed, the Warren Commission had an obvious motive to settle on the lone gunman theory and many feel it was selective in its interviews as a result. That doesn't in itself prove anything but obviously provides grist to the mill if you want to point towards a conspiracy.

[Jiminy Cricket]

The magic bullet

I'll briefly tackle this one (but, only off the top of my head), based upon - now distant - memories of explanations.

The 'magic bullet' - so-called, because it follows a non linear trajectory through the driver (I think) and then onto JFK (or was it the other way round?) - is not remotely mysterious. Whilst it is true that its path was pretty far from straight, this is because bullets typically do not follow straight lines when they pass through dense materials (bodies, in this case). When a bullet enters a body (and probably especially military rounds), they distort (as the metal jacket partially detaches), making for a widely non-aerodynamic shape. You will have, no doubt, experienced throwing something of non-aerodynamic shape through the air. It does not fly straight. In denser materials (of course flesh is much, much dense than air), such deflections from true occur over much shorter distances. The bullet does not even have to interact with bone for it curve and change direction, leaving the body at a different angle from that of entry.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's my seat-of-my-pants explanation, based upon very distant memories.

[Nobby Reserve]

I'll briefly tackle this one (but, only off the top of my head), based upon - now distant - memories of explanations.

The 'magic bullet' - so-called, because it follows a non linear trajectory through the driver (I think) and then onto JFK (or was it the other way round?) - is not remotely mysterious. Whilst it is true that its path was pretty far from straight, this is because bullets typically do not follow straight lines when they pass through dense materials (bodies, in this case). When a bullet enters a body (and probably especially military rounds), they distort (as the metal jacket partially detaches), making for a widely non-aerodynamic shape. You will have, no doubt, experienced throwing something of non-aerodynamic shape through the air. It does not fly straight. In denser materials (of course flesh is much, much dense than air), such deflections from true occur over much shorter distances. The bullet does not even have to interact with bone for it curve and change direction, leaving the body at a different angle from that of entry.

Anyway, for what it's worth, that's my seat-of-my-pants explanation, based upon very distant memories.

Think it's more that the 'single bullet theory' accepted by the Warren Commission has the bullet on a downward trajectory from the book depository window, hit JFK, travel through his neck, exit then deviate trajectory upwards, go through the accompanying Governor Connelly's chest, exit and deviate back downwards, and pass through his wrist, then embed itself in his thigh still nearly intact.

[idontknow]

I hate many Conspiracy theories. they cause a lot of damage, people are getting threatened by idiots who think 5g is dangerous. climate change deniers are making it harder for the world to fight climate change. vaccine+covid conspiracy theories point the finger of blame at people who are genuinely trying to make this world a better place which turns people into hating people like Bill Gates.

As you imply, there are many varieties, of conspiracy theory, and the term itself has become a cop-out - from both sides.

Climate change is the most important (I'm sure I ought to caveat that) to address, but where is that being fuelled from (fuelled being the operative word)? People have been raised not to think, not to question, not to inquire, not to wonder. When the Koch Bros and Murdoch pay millions to tell them to keep on doing the same, is it any surpriise they think as they're told.

It's a con game, and if you think you can't be conned, you are in all likelihood already being conned.

[McrRed]

I'll come back to the others but the discussion of whether microscopic chips are thermite is entirely irrelevant as there has never been a credible methodology proposed to explain how thermite would be used for controlled demolition of an occupied building. Thermite is not a high explosive and would be of no use in controlled demolition. Making up an imaginary type of thermite is not an answer.

As previously pointed out, none of the authors is an expert in the controlled demolition of buildings. Their main shared expertise appears to be in bvelievig abd promoting conspiracy theories.

As an aside, the phrase 'near free-fall speed' is one of the stupidest things the CTs refer to. Everything falls at free-fall speed when it's in free fall including parts of buildings when they collapse.

But the microscopic chips were part of the argument as to why the building couldn't have been control demolished.

My original scepticism came from watching the original Zeitgeist film. I'm assuming everyone discussing on here has seen it?