Jump to content

Conspiracy Theories


Rocky
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think though that in general yes a lot were "spread about" but this was more about key people getting key jobs that are specific to our time right now, as apposed to many people running and hiding. NQ - you tried to come back with the "Brit" thing to me before, this is a "global" setting nothing to do with being bias, just those up and above the ground level so to speak regardless of location, we all have bad apples that's for sure.

You really don't understand the historical context of Operation Paperclip (the American campaign to snatch up as many Nazi scientists from Germany as possible before the Russians could), do you?

The conflict between the US and Russia had been growing more or less since 1917, the year of the October Revolution. Some might say that the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were less psychological attacks on Japan and more on Russia. So, with the fall of the Reich looming, the governments of what would become the Warsaw and NATO countries scrambled to grab as many German scientists as they could before the other side did. Nobody had any long-term goals about it other than to enhance the brain trust that led to the Manhattan Project (which was instigated and led mostly by European Jews, as they were the only ones whose survival depended on leaving before things got too bad).

I'm no idealist. I don't hold to some ludicrous notion that world leaders always (or even often) do the by-god right thing while running their country. That Truman and Eisenhower gave shelter to people who may have been war criminals is abhorrent, more so knowing that the French and the English did the same thing, all in the name of resisting communism. But, knowing that that great evil had performed for that purpose, why should I believe that the plot was more nefarious, complicated, and leak prone still? That something like the Manhattan Project stayed secret is incredible, and it had the War Powers Act to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 279
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Theres a follow up doc and is now showing in certain cinemas etc or about to be that you get to see at the end of this called "Pax Americana" :

http://en.wikipedia....zation_of_Space

The idea of holding the high ground -so to speak- is not new, nor is the weaponization of space -which began as soon as Sputnik 1 achieved low Earth orbit powered by an R-7 <derived as a direct result as part of a continuation of the Nazi rocket program... if you like (See: Helmut Gröttrup).

____

You have to admit that for a boogey monster, the X-37B is kind of cute. rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't understand the historical context of Operation Paperclip (the American campaign to snatch up as many Nazi scientists from Germany as possible before the Russians could), do you?

this was more about key people getting key jobs that are specific to our time right now, as apposed to many people running and hiding.

The idea of holding the high ground -so to speak- is not new, nor is the weaponization of space -which began as soon as Sputnik 1 achieved low Earth orbit powered by an R-7

So to understand this fully because clearly I don't understand as you say ...

People get executed for murdering just a few people today, people get locked up in camps becuase they might be a terrorist or have links, people get water-boarded and tortured becuase they might have links, or some information, and the main culprit apparently has never been caught or tried or anything. Ok thats part one ...

So ... we have scientists who helped the Nazi programme which was WW2 of which millions died and were "terrorised" etc, we loose thousands upon thousands with D-Day landings to get to the final showdown, we get the bad guys, some of them are these scientists, we don't try them, execute them, imprison them or anything, but we will keep them in good shape and use them to benefit our own programme, and this is justified and the norm becuase "at least the Russians didn't get them".

How about the Russians not getting them, but as they are now in "good" hands so to speak they are imprisoned or executed based on what happened pre 1945 justifying why thousands lost lives to get to that point? I would say that would be the best situation, Chemical Ali got what was coming, and that was a drop in the ocean in comparison.

Notice that why you all cling to that boogey man left/right east/west notion that within this they are still putting this into place and it doesn't mean it wont be pointing at home either (any proof that a space based weapon wont point at home?), that's really the point of the information and these docs. And just becuase this information is "nothing new" .. it still doesn't alter that fact its happening and more and more advanced as we continue.

That Truman and Eisenhower gave shelter to people who may have been war criminals is abhorrent, more so knowing that the French and the English did the same thing, all in the name of resisting communism. But, knowing that that great evil had performed for that purpose, why should I believe that the plot was more nefarious, complicated, and leak prone still?

You admit paperclip was to smuggle out these scientists, so you would admit that it was a calculated move, but the only justification was so Russia didn't get them, yet they stopped them getting them ... great, but then went on to used them for thing we now have in space, I cant see how you cant see a pattern in this "plot". These docs have this information and again its staring people in the face, and yet again its all about a mind game to decide whether that's a good or bad thing.

I'm just wondering how forums would pan out if it was the other way in some parallel universe and its "Russia" having this at the moment, I bet these docs and information would be taken on board in moments, my point being would you not see a plot if "Russia got them"? So its not a plot if your own got them, right?

"If" you think this is all a good thing becuase your "safe" and its your "side" .. you have completely missed the point, global = anyone (selective anyone obviously).

BTW please dont drag this into "sides" and U.S etc, this again has nothing to do with people on the ground and I don't for one second think any country is exempt from these type of shenanigans, location is not important as much as whats going on "upstairs" if you will.

@DS (ref that BBC CCTV segment)

All I have to say is "Angela Jarvis" has got a good gig, sit in a noddy car and play with a joystick :)

If the scheme is seen to be a success in reducing the number of accidents, those behind it hope it could be rolled out across the UK.

How do they measure this, if they don't have the noddy car and the joystick everywhere at once then you cant measure the mount of times people used a mobile while driving and "didn't" crash!? As apposed to just stopping and fining and then saying "that stopped there inevitable car crash" ... !??? We are in a near to almost depression, got to make the digits up some how, speed cams aren't working anymore so have to have the next road boogey man.

I would like to see someone driving with no distractions, hands at the wheel etc but dressed as a mobile phone :) Then again I suspect that would be a distraction for drivers as they would all crash at the site of it so that's a fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the Russians not getting them, but as they are now in "good" hands so to speak they are imprisoned or executed based on what happened pre 1945 justifying why thousands lost lives to get to that point?
But isn't that exactly what happened...Wernher and Co. were not in the same league as the top-tier decision makers.

By your standards(?), we would still be busy judging, imprisoning and/or executing those who played any role, in any uniform, and in any capacity.

Notice that why you all cling to that boogey man left/right east/west notion that within this they are still putting this into place and it doesn't mean it wont be pointing at home either (any proof that a space based weapon wont point at home?), that's really the point of the information and these docs. And just becuase this information is "nothing new" .. it still doesn't alter that fact its happening and more and more advanced as we continue.
As you are quick to point out this topic is on Conspiracy Theories so... ...Where's the beef?

You know, something for Ramón Antonio Gerard & Carlos Irwin Estévez, and James George Janos & the ilk to sink their teeth into.

Surely Dr. Wood, or one of her associates -were they to put their imaginations to it- could provide documentary evidence of Dr Evils' secret Moon lair where all of these sinister plots are hatched, maybe even some snaps of the "Laser"?

"If" you think this is all a good thing becuase your "safe" and its your "side" .. you have completely missed the point, global = anyone (selective anyone obviously).

BTW please dont drag this into "sides" and U.S etc, this again has nothing to do with people on the ground and I don't for one second think any country is exempt from these type of shenanigans, location is not important as much as whats going on "upstairs" if you will.

You seen to be at pains in stressing that ...which only leads to the question.

Who exactly are you trying to convince?

Before replying, there is no need, as it was rhetorical. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You admit paperclip was to smuggle out these scientists, so you would admit that it was a calculated move, but the only justification was so Russia didn't get them, yet they stopped them getting them ... great, but then went on to used them for thing we now have in space, I cant see how you cant see a pattern in this "plot". These docs have this information and again its staring people in the face, and yet again its all about a mind game to decide whether that's a good or bad thing.

The scientists smuggled out were weapons scientists. Most of them ended up with jobs for NASA or the Air Force designing rockets. Who ever got the most Nazi scientists would end up with the next V2 rocket, thus a more powerful weapon. That was the stated goal. In 1945. It was not some noble humanitarian effort. It was in the interest of waging future wars. Everybody knew it from the start, including the scientists. Their intellects and experiences provided them a bargaining chip to whichever side they chose to defect to. If you're insinuating something else, you're ignoring the blindingly obvious. Operation Paperclip led directly to the space race, which was about demonstrating ICBM technology.

Edited by petsfed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@petsfed

I hope you can see how your post would have been equally as informative without the first paragraph, because referring to other members in such a manner is not permitted on these forums. I am pretty sure I warned you about that before. That paragraph adds nothing to the debate other than to try and belittle and/or incite another member, and that is the stuff of school yards not intelligent discussion.

If you continue in that manner your posting rights will be revoked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@petsfed

I hope you can see how your post would have been equally as informative without the first paragraph, because referring to other members in such a manner is not permitted on these forums. I am pretty sure I warned you about that before. That paragraph adds nothing to the debate other than to try and belittle and/or incite another member, and that is the stuff of school yards not intelligent discussion.

If you continue in that manner your posting rights will be revoked.

You haven't warned me about it before, no. If there's still time, I'll go ahead and edit it though. Apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who exactly are you trying to convince?

Its a forum, you can make your own mind up, but make it an informed one :) Shoot, I answered .....

As you are quick to point out this topic is on Conspiracy Theories so... ...Where's the beef?

Beef? (I do love that expression BTW :) ) Going by Rocky's post it certainly isn't me sir. No beef here, just trying to point out that however which way you explain it (and granted explained well) does it actually mean that weaponization of space is a good thing? Does it mean that having this outcome no matter what route it actually has taken means that space based weapons wouldn't be used "at home" so to speak. Thats the point, and there's a fine line on "theory" with this one I might add, Not how it came so much as how it is right now.

You know, something for Ramón Antonio Gerard & Carlos Irwin Estévez, and James George Janos & the ilk to sink their teeth into.

How about everyone and anyone as its above our heads?

Surely Dr. Wood, or one of her associates -were they to put their imaginations to it- could provide documentary evidence of Dr Evils' secret Moon lair where all of these sinister plots are hatched, maybe even some snaps of the "Laser"?

Wood if you read and listen to all the interviews and everything else doesn't come from this way of working, but you would know that if you went through it and listened to interviews. The rest is your take on it and I know what that take is :). I dont think she would be posting "look heres the laser its Dr Evils moon lair" anytime soon, if anything her point is basically "look at the end result of the day and all the anomalies, try and tie that to plane fuel alone, but here a hypothesis to look into the anomalies". And seeing as there are things in space we and you and most know NOTHING about you then cannot say that its not possible or far fetched (or stretches of imagination) when looking at these hypothesis.

The scientists smuggled out were weapons scientists. Most of them ended up with jobs for NASA or the Air Force designing rockets. Who ever got the most Nazi scientists would end up with the next V2 rocket, thus a more powerful weapon. That was the stated goal. In 1945. It was not some noble humanitarian effort. It was in the interest of waging future wars. Everybody knew it from the start, including the scientists. Their intellects and experiences provided them a bargaining chip to whichever side they chose to defect to. If you're insinuating something else, you're ignoring the blindingly obvious. Operation Paperclip led directly to the space race, which was about demonstrating ICBM technology.

They had choices? I thought paperclip was to smuggle them out SO they didn't go with "the other side" :) ? I don't disagree with you on how it came to be, and also the justification of it from history. All im saying is that as you agree this is the case then theirs less of a "theory" as to forward fast to 2010 and space, what the docs are referring too IE .. Nazis were used to help push the programme that has now lead to moving into weaponising space ... pretty much it, and the end result is ... was that all a good thing? And is this for your safety, really?

It was in the interest of waging future wars.

Damn right it was.

PC world : The Next Generation May be 'Chipped'

http://www.pcworld.com/article/198664

/the_next_generation_may_be_chipped.html?tk=hp_new

Like previous comments this isn't a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scientists smuggled out were weapons scientists. Most of them ended up with jobs for NASA or the Air Force designing rockets. Who ever got the most Nazi scientists would end up with the next V2 rocket, thus a more powerful weapon. That was the stated goal. In 1945. It was not some noble humanitarian effort. It was in the interest of waging future wars. Everybody knew it from the start, including the scientists. Their intellects and experiences provided them a bargaining chip to whichever side they chose to defect to. If you're insinuating something else, you're ignoring the blindingly obvious. Operation Paperclip led directly to the space race, which was about demonstrating ICBM technology.

They had choices? I thought paperclip was to smuggle them out SO they didn't go with "the other side" :) ? I don't disagree with you on how it came to be, and also the justification of it from history. All im saying is that as you agree this is the case then theirs less of a "theory" as to forward fast to 2010 and space, what the docs are referring too IE .. Nazis were used to help push the programme that has now lead to moving into weaponising space ... pretty much it, and the end result is ... was that all a good thing? And is this for your safety, really?

It was in the interest of waging future wars.

Damn right it was.

Well, interpret it however you want. If you're so bereft of ethics as to commit war crimes (as some of the Paperclip scientists were), would stick around to be eventually hanged for said crimes? Or would you let a superpower spirit you away so you could keep working?

My point, however, is that if this is a grand conspiracy scheme, the planners were pretty bad about. The press started interviewing the Paperclip scientists in 1946. Not a couple of crackpots with a theory, the PRESS. The hard part was slipping them past Truman's "no-nazis" rule, which is where the conspiracy came in. The Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency falsified a great many dossiers so as to get these guys over. Even then, that didn't survive more than a few decades, with a few of these guys eventually getting deported.

What I'm getting at (and why I lost patience earlier, thanks to Rocky for reining me back in) is that you don't have to assume a bigger conspiracy than is already there. Sure there was a conspiracy on 9/11. It involved 17 men getting on airplanes, and one detained beforehand. Why assume any bigger? Do the players you suggest have the motive? Sure. But they do not have the means, unless the destruction was planned before 1970 (when the first of the two towers was completed), and was kept secret through 1987 (when 7 WTC was completed) until 2001. There would've been no other time, in its entire history, when the amount of work necessary to prepare a controlled demolition (as you want to claim is a possibility) without somebody outside of the conspiracy making some sort of comment. Or you expect me to believe that everyone who could've been present to view such a thing is part of the conspiracy, and is therefore partially culpable for the 3000+ deaths. I dunno about you, but most people I've met simply do not have the stomach to have the deaths of an entire neighborhood on their hands. So no means or opportunity.

As I said before, its on you to provide evidence to support your position. And that evidence has to exist independently of your goal. A big problem with the wiki culture is that everybody assumes that if you have a lot of sources, then your position must be solid. But if all your sources are garbage, then your position really isn't solid. Do you have the ability to evaluate your sources? No? Then you are the wrong person to be presenting the case. I'm not saying shut up, I'm saying that you should find somebody who can evaluate your sources before you present your case. And I think you'll find that people who are capable of evaluating all of the evidence are uniformly in disagreement with you. I'm willing to give it a listen, but you have to present a cohesive case, rather than speculation based on a few irregularities. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I know that stacks the deck against new ideas, but if you have the evidence to show specifically how the accepted theory is wrong (this is the core of testability, and what separates good scientists from good theorists), then I will accept your view. If both theories explain all of the observed phenomenon with no exceptions or mutual contradictions, then you should choose the theory that has the fewest wild cards. As I said, a conspiracy of 18 is much MUCH easier to swallow than a conspiracy of thousands.

For the record, I find chipping of the human population unsettling, but I do not believe that its proponents are pushing it out of malice. There is the strong possibility that someday, someone will use it for nefarious ends, but there are no cartoonish supervillians. Nobody is simply waiting for the last puzzle piece to fall into place before launching their master plan. What loopholes there are in whatever system comes about, it is from incompetence, not specific ill-will. To assume otherwise would be to assume that Toyota's engineers designed faulty brake-systems because of some inherent evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or would you let a superpower spirit you away so you could keep working?

Would you think the superpower should do the honorable thing and not let them continue seeing as they are war criminals?

What I'm getting at (and why I lost patience earlier, thanks to Rocky for reining me back in) is that you don't have to assume a bigger conspiracy than is already there.

Assume? How do you know that I simply assumed it?

Or you expect me to believe that everyone who could've been present to view such a thing is part of the conspiracy, and is therefore partially culpable for the 3000+ deaths.

Wow that's a massive leap isnt it? I haven't expected anything of you, and I certainly dont think you should remotely believe that. Im not sure where you going on this point at all to be honest.

As I said before, its on you to provide evidence to support your position. And that evidence has to exist independently of your goal.

There is a common list of anomalies (large ones) from that day & time that have not be squared up, just explained away or frantically debunked, I wont repeat them again but they are mentioned many times. Jet fuel and collapse theory don't exactly square them away, I think you might find its people wanting official lines to explain this, which haven't been and therefore a fixed position of the official line is not a foundation to be completely 100% on .. yet its up to the people pointing this out and looking at this that need to prove to YOU as if in some way they are non existent anomalies until proven they don't "fit" jet fuel, box cutter Norad foolers and .. well again the list is there, which clearly they, well, just don't. The case has always been there for all to view.

Do you have the ability to evaluate your sources? No? Then you are the wrong person to be presenting the case

Im not presenting a case, im a person that sees whats not really adding up and come very shady and sketchy things happening as we move forward and as there is a place to post this in this thread I well, do. Its others that pile in with "PROVE IT" and get very angry etc ... I say, decide to not look into it and well, have a good day. I understand there's two views to everything, but if you switch the logic in reverse its very interesting indeed. This also goes for most things posted here.

If both theories explain all of the observed phenomenon with no exceptions or mutual contradictions, then you should choose the theory that has the fewest wild cards. As I said, a conspiracy of 18 is much MUCH easier to swallow than a conspiracy of thousands.

Wild cards, jesus there are quite a few with 9/11 from the official report, that being the point. Its all up and out their, the rest is a battle to win the "hearts & minds" as they say, you make your choice, I choose to not have a fixed position, you choose a different view and others, great .. but when we are all pushing up daisies things will steamroll on.

For the record, I find chipping of the human population unsettling, but I do not believe that its proponents are pushing it out of malice.

What is "nice" and "good" and the opposite to malice about chipping a human? Taking on board what that actually is ... to take a external foreign body of circuitry you know next to nothing about into your body (transmitter as well as receiver) , we have never "needed" it since mans existence. The very fact its being debated now in such articles should make people worry (there was a time less than a few years that even the mention to debate it as was shouted down and laughed), its not and never will be a "good" thing for humans, but that's not the main concern .. it will be peddled early to younger generations via conditioning with thumb scans and all the soft approaches coming into play now, conspiracy or not things are being put in place which ultimately makes the next generation mor accept ant to this type of tech, which even you know is worrying.

And that leads me on to ...

Nobody is simply waiting for the last puzzle piece to fall into place before launching their master plan. What loopholes there are in whatever system comes about, it is from incompetence, not specific ill-will.

The fact you know there are loopholes and we all know there is a tirade of incompetence (just check the news daily) then any system with the corporations pushing this into fruition aren't "nobody" and this is all to do with tracking and chipping humans that you are also noted to be unsettled about. It is "in your face" as they say and the rest is the mind game to choose whether to think malice or not. One things for sure media will (and is) peddling it as the next "cool".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have the ability to evaluate your sources? No? Then you are the wrong person to be presenting the case

Im not presenting a case, im a person that sees whats not really adding up and come very shady and sketchy things happening as we move forward and as there is a place to post this in this thread I well, do. Its others that pile in with "PROVE IT" and get very angry etc ... I say, decide to not look into it and well, have a good day. I understand there's two views to everything, but if you switch the logic in reverse its very interesting indeed. This also goes for most things posted here.

Except that I don't mind being proven wrong. What I mind is the growing tendency amongst people to believe that facts are a matter of consensus. And part of that is the mistaken belief that a group of people, without regard to background or ability, can evaluate information as well or better than referees for a peer-reviewed journal. That mistaken belief has led to the promulgation of several erroneous "theories" (to my scientific mind, since they make no independent predictions and are not, for the most part, testable, they aren't really theories) that are doing as much damage to the general populace as the apparent conspiracy they are trying to fight.

For the record, I find chipping of the human population unsettling, but I do not believe that its proponents are pushing it out of malice.

What is "nice" and "good" and the opposite to malice about chipping a human? Taking on board what that actually is ... to take a external foreign body of circuitry you know next to nothing about into your body (transmitter as well as receiver) , we have never "needed" it since mans existence. The very fact its being debated now in such articles should make people worry (there was a time less than a few years that even the mention to debate it as was shouted down and laughed), its not and never will be a "good" thing for humans, but that's not the main concern .. it will be peddled early to younger generations via conditioning with thumb scans and all the soft approaches coming into play now, conspiracy or not things are being put in place which ultimately makes the next generation mor accept ant to this type of tech, which even you know is worrying.

And that leads me on to ...

Nobody is simply waiting for the last puzzle piece to fall into place before launching their master plan. What loopholes there are in whatever system comes about, it is from incompetence, not specific ill-will.

The fact you know there are loopholes and we all know there is a tirade of incompetence (just check the news daily) then any system with the corporations pushing this into fruition aren't "nobody" and this is all to do with tracking and chipping humans that you are also noted to be unsettled about. It is "in your face" as they say and the rest is the mind game to choose whether to think malice or not. One things for sure media will (and is) peddling it as the next "cool".

What I mean to say is that I don't think the push for chipping is led by some Dr. Evil-style monomaniacal supervillain. I think its a lot of people who only see the "keep track of your kids!" angle and don't realize the ways the technology could be misused. The people who would misuse it probably expect the "mark of the beast" counterargument to defeat such a notion before it got off the ground. I mean, it stopped federal ID cards every time they've been tried in the past.

Like I said, I find it unsettling, but out of mistrust of the abilities of the pushers, not the motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calius, some of your latest posts are somewhat confusing. If you don't want people to debunk your theories, then why are you posting them? The attitude that you seem to be conveying in this latest post raises a huge red flag. If you can't handle people raising objections to your ideas, and if you can't handle people debunking your theories, then perhaps you'd be better-served by not posting them. I'm going to turn your post around on you. You said:

What is commonly known as demonize those who have questions ...

It sounds to me like it's okay for you to question others, but that it's not okay for others to question you.

What is this, the instruction book on "how to debunk for dummies"? You don't undermine anything, you just answer the un answered questions people have. To have to challenge and try to "undermine" spells out this inst the case, if it is all cut & dried and simple you don't need to take such steps. It takes a lot of effort to do this and keep it up, wasted on a bunch of lunatics if you ask me.

Here's what you aren't understanding: If your "answers" (and I use that term loosely) actually made sense, and if your "answers" were actually logical, then people wouldn't need to debunk them. If you could just step back, and realize how absolutely foolish some of the "theories" that have been posted in this thread really are, then you may understand why people feel the need to debunk them.

Stop clogging up the thread with "anti conspiracy" things which isn't, again I say this taking a deep breath & a sigh ... what this thread was/is about.

No, clearly this thread was about posting unverifiable and unprovable theories, with no room for objective criticism of those ideas. It's rather funny how you're doing the same thing of which you accuse your opponents of doing: Silencing criticism. Again, if your ideas were logical and sensible, then perhaps people wouldn't pick them apart so handily. The further into your 9/11 conspiracies one gets, the more incredible leaps of logic one must make, until we're forced to question everything. At some point, however, Ockham's Razor must come into play: All things being equal, the simplest explanation must be true. Of course, folks like yourself will argue against even that accepted principle by saying "But all things aren't equal." At that point, those of us who aren't caught up in this nonsense have to just shake our heads at the apparent inability to separate fantasy from reality.

Its more to do with not adding anything constructive/related to this threads subject matter, not about me or taking offense, does that make it any clearer?

No, my friend. I think the issue is that you take any criticism of your ideas, or the thought processes upon which you base your ideas, as being somehow negative or unwarranted, or as personal attacks upon yourself. You need to learn that criticism of your ideas does not equal criticism of you as a person. NoQuarter is right: Once you get outside of your comfort zone, and once you start hearing people not only disagree, but also dismantle your theories, you get upset. I've seen you do it time and time again.

All that said, it really is befuddling to me how otherwise intelligent human beings can be bamboozled by wild fantasies like some of the ones posted in this thread. To accept some of these utterly ridiculous 9/11 theories, one has to abandon scientific principles, and even common sense itself, and adapt an almost schizophrenic sense of mistrust and disbelief in everything and everyone around you. How and why people who are obviously intelligent come to believe in theories that so clearly lack any basis in reality is, I think, more important than what those people believe.

Edited by Parabellum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

]If you don't want people to debunk your theories, then why are you posting them? The attitude that you seem to be conveying in this latest post raises a huge red flag. If you can't handle people raising objections to your ideas, and if you can't handle people debunking your theories, then perhaps you'd be better-served by not posting them.

I think your trying to say im something that's not. Its simple, I post what seems to be quite logical as to things that are happening and are raised elsewhere (whether you or anyone likes them or not because by default you don't in which case by your logic I shouldn't post at all in that case), under a thread based on the title it suggests, then you mainly get people not really debating the subject but "counter calius" ... and if your read a few pages its basically been NQ (entitled to do so to a point) and not many others pretty much going down that route as apposed to debunking anything of the subjects even if they do post. Mainly based on sarcasm slants, rocky having to get involved to "reign in" people and a lot of talk about nutters, nutjobs, and posting of PDF's suggesting that this way of thinking is a "threat" .. I mean jesus it really doesn't have to actually be such a problem does it. I have agreed to disagree many times and also think what people have posted directly is good as it shows counter arguments and so on that's the debate, I don't call nutter and I don't post things about thinking patterns being a "threat" and so on.

I think the issue is that you take any criticism of your ideas, or the thought processes upon which you base your ideas, as being somehow negative or unwarranted, or as personal attacks upon yourself

But if you shout nutter, and scitzo and well many other such lovely terms your are then in some respects pointing them toward me as im under that "umbrella" so to speak, right? They don't say to me "positive and warranted" really either no matter the angle. I don't take it personal as you don't see me get angry here do you? I mean people are fast enough to go down that route per-post. The confusion I think people have is they think its all me and MY theories to debunk, these are world wide thoughts not just this thread and my head.

I think NQ was trying to trip me up red "Clone" ... which is my way of saying sticking firmly to something "without" question whatsoever.

Ok ... Para you based responses off of some quotes so let me put them into perspective:

What is commonly known as demonize those who have questions ...

This quote you used for your point refers back a few pages to NQ's PDF link & quote which basically states what I said in that quote (not word for word obviously). I was referring to the PDF its pretty clear in the thread have a read of it then you know what I was referring too (it was basically calling people a "threat" hence "demozing" etc). Not to people posting here with replies to subjects.

What is this, the instruction book on "how to debunk for dummies"? You don't undermine anything, you just answer the un answered questions people have. To have to challenge and try to "undermine" spells out this isnt the case, if it is all cut & dried and simple you don't need to take such steps. It takes a lot of effort to do this and keep it up, wasted on a bunch of lunatics if you ask me.

This quote again is about that PDF .. my point here being that to set out a plan to undermine = a lot of effort, no effort is needed if its all B.S and loones that are as you say foolish to boot, ... again that's all this was referring too. As regards your reply to this quote:

If you could just step back, and realize how absolutely foolish some of the "theories" that have been posted in this thread really are, then you may understand why people feel the need to debunk them.

Have you ever stepped back to think that yes it is still a "theory" in some cases and some aren't fact. Plus I don't staunchly think every facet is a fact, but are a valid point for "debate" given the anomalies and worthy posting in this relevant subjects thread?

Why react to a B.S / foolish posts in a "theory" thread about theory's? Post a link or debate the subject, so far its been a few pages of noise but links scattered within it, or simply you have staunchly apposed to the theory so its fish in a barrel to call nutter each time in a loop per conspiracy link or post. Maybe even post something you think is really odd, for example .. there's a Tinker post about scanners that's a good one, or could be valid here also for example.

Stop clogging up the thread with "anti conspiracy" things which isn't, again I say this taking a deep breath & a sigh ... what this thread was/is about.

Was, yet again .... about that PDF, IE don't clog it up with blatant documents calling for people of this way of thinking to be a "threat" ... THAT is what im saying ref the clogging up so to speak (not being relevant to the subject link). Nothing about silencing criticism which your trying to pin on me.

The further into your 9/11 conspiracies one gets, the more incredible leaps of logic one must make, until we're forced to question everything.

Since when have humans got into a position that questioning everything was so bad? How can you be forced to do this, you seem pretty good and shutting down on the fantasy so your not forced as you can clearly see yourself.

All things being equal, the simplest explanation must be true. Of course, folks like yourself will argue against even that accepted principle by saying "But all things aren't equal." At that point, those of us who aren't caught up in this nonsense have to just shake our heads at the apparent inability to separate fantasy from reality.

Unanswered valid questions, question and the ability to put all scenarios on the table and not fix to just one are not a fantasy, reversing the end result and looking back at the official line can often do wonders to work out if foundations are rock solid to cast off everything else as skitzo or nutjob or, well, any other tag line.

and adapt an almost schizophrenic sense of mistrust and disbelief in everything and everyone around you.

Ah no, I think your looking too "local" which can bundle that into the nutter category, I see what you did their :) I think its " a healthy questioning and open view of things, and people above you" ... that might work best the rest is your particular take on it which is fine by me if you think that.

Para .. we agree to differ but when something posted in a relevant place which rather than people sensibly link to things to say check this out or, that's interesting I will look at that, you get "nutter" "nutjob" "BS" ... and pretty much the angle of your post I think im entitled to respond, ive posted maybe what 2-3 (I think?) or so links recently and its been pages and pages of quote stacking and out of context sarcasm slants and such which ive responded too ... that amazes me more than even the threads topic. Maybe im just interested in human nature, who knows. Although do you have anything to "add" to this as apposed to hitting me back quote after out-of-context quote?

Is there ANYTHING in Para's world that you have thought, hmmm this is weird it doesn't stack up? Please post if you wish (and don't be sarcastic and post "this thread" ... :) ) Conspiracy and theories don't always have to be 9/11 and the large big things.

@Petsfed:

Except that I don't mind being proven wrong.

I don't mind actually "being" wrong contrary to how people might think I am ... i just mind sarcasm slants and posts which don't really do anything but seem to be questioning "me" as apposed to the point or link of the post.

What I mind is the growing tendency amongst people to believe that facts are a matter of consensus. And part of that is the mistaken belief that a group of people, without regard to background or ability, can evaluate information as well or better than referees for a peer-reviewed journal.

Well, in all fairness that's a good point, I can see how that gets the back up of anyone IE: What would they know about it? Although when you have corporate invested interests, a lot of corruption "up top" ..influencing, structures and groups (we dont all know the full details of) we have to be at the very least wary of such peers, especially in the current climate. Some go as far as to be wary, some goes as far as to call conspiracy.

That mistaken belief has led to the promulgation of several erroneous "theories" (to my scientific mind, since they make no independent predictions and are not, for the most part, testable, they aren't really theories) that are doing as much damage to the general populace as the apparent conspiracy they are trying to fight.

I cant see any "damage" as such, no more damage than is happening in the world right now even if a theory didn't exist. But having said that I see your point though.

Like I said, I find it unsettling, but out of mistrust of the abilities of the pushers, not the motives.

As regards this topic I see the view you are coming from, you don't exactly see it as "great" but in my view ( my own view) I don't think it should ever have a pusher in the first instance, it opens doors to very dark places and a mistrust of the ability alone for me is enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...it opens doors to very dark places and a mistrust of the ability alone for me is enough.
But just how far do you take that level of mistrust of technology (or of human nature) today?

At some point you'll have to dial down the freak-o-meter or eventually you will be looking at your memory-foam mattress with suspicion.

Finding a happy medium (with both) will have you sleeping soundly...right up until the black helicopters arrive that is. biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your trying to say im something that's not. Its simple, I post what seems to be quite logical as to things that are happening and are raised elsewhere (whether you or anyone likes them or not because by default you don't in which case by your logic I shouldn't post at all in that case), under a thread based on the title it suggests, then you mainly get people not really debating the subject but "counter calius" ... and if your read a few pages its basically been NQ (entitled to do so to a point) and not many others pretty much going down that route as apposed to debunking anything of the subjects even if they do post. Mainly based on sarcasm slants, rocky having to get involved to "reign in" people and a lot of talk about nutters, nutjobs, and posting of PDF's suggesting that this way of thinking is a "threat" .. I mean jesus it really doesn't have to actually be such a problem does it. I have agreed to disagree many times and also think what people have posted directly is good as it shows counter arguments and so on that's the debate, I don't call nutter and I don't post things about thinking patterns being a "threat" and so on.

Calius, this is what you're missing: Most of the theories that have been posted in this thread, and most of the 'evidence' for those theories aren't logical. Common scientific principles must be discarded to make them work. Common sense must be discarded to make them work. There's nothing logical at all about the theory that the WTC was brought down by explosive charges. Nothing. In fact, the idea complete defies reason and rationality.

Since when have humans got into a position that questioning everything was so bad? How can you be forced to do this, you seem pretty good and shutting down on the fantasy so your not forced as you can clearly see yourself.

The inability or unwillingness of human beings to accept answers that are based on sound science and reasoning points to a deeper issue than simply questioning things. From a psychological perspective, I think that the need to question everything stems from an individual's deep-seated fear and mistrust of those around him/her, sometimes to the point of paranoia. As human beings, we're programmed to shun those who seem to be 'defective', for lack of a better term, and the the levels of paranoia present in many conspiracy theories rise to a level that, in some cases, borders on paranoid schizophrenia. I'm not saying that about you personally. But I think that it's important to understand the psychology behind the issues.

Unanswered valid questions, question and the ability to put all scenarios on the table and not fix to just one are not a fantasy, reversing the end result and looking back at the official line can often do wonders to work out if foundations are rock solid to cast off everything else as skitzo or nutjob or, well, any other tag line.

But those 'valid' questions have been answered. Some people just don't like the answers. At some point, one has to look at himself, and ask "Why do I question everything? Are the answers really unsatisfactory, or is there some issue within me that's causing me to question things." I again point to the theories suggesting that the WTC was brought down by placed charges as evidence that some people will go to any lengths to reject the 'established' answer, simply because it's the established answer.

Ah no, I think your looking too "local" which can bundle that into the nutter category, I see what you did their :) I think its " a healthy questioning and open view of things, and people above you" ... that might work best the rest is your particular take on it which is fine by me if you think that.

But are conspiracy theories really healthy, and are the views really open? I would argue that they aren't. By outright rejecting well-reasoned answers to questions that have already been asked, conspiracy theory proponents are actually limiting the potential pool of answers. The rejection of the 'mainstream' or 'established' answers, simply because of their status as widely-accepted limits the potential answers to one's questions.

Conspiracy theories often assume a cause, and then look for correlation between that cause, and the subsequent effects. For example, one conspiracy theorist might say "I think that the government blew up the buildings to frame Al Queda, so that we could go to war." , look for evidence to support that claim and then assume that all evidence somehow supports that claim, even to the point of ignoring proven answers to the contrary. That's both bad science and bad investigative technique. The honest and open method for investigation is to look for evidence, and then follow that evidence back, to find the cause. It's one thing to form a hypothesis, and then test that hypothesis. It's another thing entirely to assume that hypothesis is true, and then skew the evidence in order to prove it. Conspiracy theories rely on the latter method: Assume that it's true, and find the evidence to prove it. In conspiracy theories, almost all evidence points to the theory being true, at least in the minds of believers. In reality, evidence is often conflicting, confusing, and requires careful analysis to come to any fruitful conclusion.

Is there ANYTHING in Para's world that you have thought, hmmm this is weird it doesn't stack up? Please post if you wish (and don't be sarcastic and post "this thread" ... :) ) Conspiracy and theories don't always have to be 9/11 and the large big things.

Are there things that don't stack up? Sure. When I look into such things though, I don't assume that there's some nefarious, far-reaching plot to obfuscate the details of the happenings. I start at Point B, and look for evidence that points to a Point A, whatever it might be. Sometimes I'm right in the end. Sometimes I'm wrong. Sometimes, I never figure it out. The point though, is that theories such as the WTC being brought down by placed charges require a complexity and collective secrecy of such wide and far-reaching scale that they become humanly impossible. At some point, one has to question himself and his own motives for believing in conspiracies, if one is to remain intellectually honest. I think it's the refusal or unwillingness to do that, which frustrates many of the rest of us.

Edited by Parabellum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is Para you seem to be speaking a lot about what even I would class as "extreme theorists" ... as in a blanket view of all. I dont subscribe to a lot of things out their, no plains, missiles, Paul From The Beatles was "swapped" ... Aliens are reptilians and here with us now ... the moon is a spaceship and so on. The list goes on. What I dont subscribe too is Jet Fuel causes all the domino effects throughout that event and below and surrounding areas, that doesn't cover it, it truly does not.

The rest is your view on psychology of people, I have a family member who has schizophrenia and has never once spoken about any thing like this even when I mentioned it, it goes over their head becuase they have too many voices clouding the thought process (close member with it since 1994) I think I know a little bit about this as I have got them committed and gone through the whole process with social workers etc etc etc , I think to tie that condition with this area is way too simplistic a view and slightly offensive to many. It is after all your view, and your entitled to it I guess, you could even go as far as to say "prove it" and its ironically a theory that thinking this way = that condition in some way. What your take on it is an extreme one, you can have people question and not have a fixed view without them actually having a mental condition, but then that's a prefect way to use this logic to shut down on any subject where there are questions, IE background noise (I speak in general not you specific on "use this").

But those 'valid' questions have been answered. Some people just don't like the answers.

Yes, that have and your right. Do they explain the anomalies? That's the point, yes they are answers to specifics but they dont >> EXPLAIN FULLY << NOT becuase people shut off every answer, I agree the answers are logical and it is a little crazy to think it was anything but the official line, but, again, as has been said it doesn't FULLY answer all the anomalies surrounding it JUST from the official standpoint. And those are listed through this thread and elsewhere, and are open to debate and will do so becuase that's the nature of it.

Guaranteed without a shadow of a doubt nothing will ever be enough for you and some select others to think anything other than your view because of the "prove it or else its just nonsense" , and that's fair enough I can see where and why you would (Contrary to what you might think I genuinely can see both sides of it). But that's your view of it and how much can that be recycled and the point be labored in a thread that is about all this type of thing? Its as much as to say, if it s a conspiracy theory dont post it becuase by default it cant be proven to us, and yet it can be posted with views different to yours becuase that's the way of the world and also relevant to this thread.

Para you entered this thread recently again with nothing about the subjects posted, nor have provided anything about key questions or answers or even debate on any recent bits and pieces posted and just said "its been answered" and your view on thought processes etc ... great, its no shock to the system what so ever that you have that view, but do you have anything to "add" to this thread other than just that, for example subjects / points / links ... interesting inks and so forthe?

BTW: didn't we have all this discussion about views on this etc via PM not so long ago? I though that was said and done?

@NQ:

But just how far do you take that level of mistrust of technology (or of human nature) today?

A healthy dose of never take things at face value and check details surrounding it does not hurt anyone especial about a tech that enters your own body. Or any tech that has privacy issues and so on. When your born there is not a manual of instructions that says you cant. Free will, choice, thinking, thought, etc etc etc.

How far you go is based on how much is being pushed onto you (privacy etc).

At some point you'll have to dial down the freak-o-meter or eventually you will be looking at your memory-foam mattress with suspicion.

So it goes back to some mental psychology to have this view ... what a shock, again. If you ever have a situation big or small in your own life where you know somethings "up" and you cant prove it directly but have a view on why ... going by this logic that instant thought process is some kind of mental disability .. in that case no one here is exempt from it then :)

Its funny I bet the picture in your minds is like Doc out of back to the future or something ... does make me laugh :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast quantities of ore and minerals announced exist in Afganistan. I would have put 'discovered', but it seems this wealth has been known for some years. Also, records of the put options made on the airline industry prior to 9/11 have been destroyed. One of the main 9/11 conspracies implies there was insider trading taking place, resulting in individuals and companies benefited as a direct result of 9/11.

DS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Just as vast quanities of ore and minerals or other natural resources -ripe for exploitation- were announced following Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Serbia, Dominican Rep, & Iraq (again), etc.

Why oh why are we so singularly ineffective at reaping all of these benefits of our conquests.

Poppies...Poppies. Poppies.

____

... in that case no one here is exempt from it then :)

You got me there...I am convinced that the neighbors down the street are aliens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Calius: My contribution is simply to point out that a healthy dose of logic and reality is all that's needed to debunk 75% of these 'theories'. Why haven't I posted any evidence? I haven't posted any evidence because the people who believe in things like 9/11 being a government job won't believe any evidence that dismisses their theory. Yourself included. There is no open, honest discussion on the topics in this thread. I've posted evidence. NoQuarter and WK have posted evidence. It gets ignored, or skewed so that it can be re-explained as a part of this ever-broadening notion that somehow the US Government and/or the Jews planned and executed 9/11.

You want to know the US Government's true role in 9/11? Sheer, unmitigated stupidity. There were mounds of intelligence pointing to the fact that something big was going to happen, even before Bill Clinton left office. Long before that, though, the United States contributed to the mess that we're in by supporting the mujahedin in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. The very same people that the United States trained, equipped, and funded turned Afghanistan into a safe-haven for religious nutbags and fanatics. We're now fighting against the people who we helped decades ago. The USA's aid to Afghanistan against the Soviets, and the collective failure of government agencies to piece together the evidence leading to 9/11 were this nation's contribution to the disaster. No vast government conspiracy. No Jewish plot. Stupidity and carelessness on the part of the flight schools and government agencies in the US was sufficient.

quick edit

In case anyone missed the sarcasm in NoQuarter's post: We haven't yet reaped any sizeable reward from our foray's into any of said countries. It's funny how Iraq was supposedly about oil. Yet, the price of oil has skyrocketed. Fears of shortages grip the market regularly. It strains logic to think that some people believe the United States government was somehow capable of manipulating some vast conspiratorial plot for years, and then suddenly became so inept that we bungled the execution of that impossibly-cunning conspiracy.

Edited by Parabellum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast quantities of ore and minerals announced exist in Afganistan. I would have put 'discovered', but it seems this wealth has been known for some years. Also, records of the put options made on the airline industry prior to 9/11 have been destroyed. One of the main 9/11 conspracies implies there was insider trading taking place, resulting in individuals and companies benefited as a direct result of 9/11.

DS

Yeah, the Soviets announced that when they tried to occupy Afganistan. Truly an effective tactics, that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why haven't I posted any evidence? I haven't posted any evidence because the people who believe in things like 9/11 being a government job won't believe any evidence that dismisses their theory. Yourself included.

Ive mainly seen building collapse explanations, collapse theory and things such as that but that's only part of it really. Either way 9/11 is but one conspiracy of many and we had a thread about that before which it was locked so that was that I guess, I have posted that I wouldn't try to repeat "too much" things. Either way the evidence given is always pancake and the end result is ... well ... I would then repeat wouldn't I so I will let that be., it cant be taken any further unless theirs a full impartial proper investigation of the evidence and, well, that was melted down and gone from the "crime scene". The rest is for all to see and work out for themselves.

There is no open, honest discussion on the topics in this thread.

Well, all i can say is many post "B.S" and dont discuss much at all apart from the fact that theories are debunked and game over, which narrows the discussion somewhat at times. If im blamed for dismissing (read this thread in full I think I can be open within this area a lot) then Para you are the mirror image of the exact same accusation, I said it before the rest is choices, no ones exempt from that view to be honest.

You want to know the US Government's true role in 9/11? Sheer, unmitigated stupidity.

Yes indeed I agree, there are many aspects that show this, although one major aspect is "NORAD became dumb for a day" doesn't cut it for many.

I did find this interesting though, I'm not saying anything ... just placing it into related thread, take it as you find:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU

Long before that, though, the United States contributed to the mess that we're in by supporting the mujahedin in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. The very same people that the United States trained, equipped, and funded turned Afghanistan into a safe-haven for religious nutbags and fanatics. We're now fighting against the people who we helped decades ago.

Welcome to the madness.

It's funny how Iraq was supposedly about oil.

Well if it wasn't that and it wasn't 45 min attack WMD ... the justifications getting pretty thin on the ground eh, if it was Saddam we were on the doorstep in 1991. I think some try to link him to 9/11 which is nearly comical, you clear that little lot out the picture and you have to ask, what was it supposedly about? (Sidenote: as ive mentioned before this is to be taken away from the people on the ground fighting / jobs and not related directly, so please dont pull that chestnut out of the bag if someone was thinking of it .. im just saying is all).

Yet, the price of oil has skyrocketed. Fears of shortages grip the market regularly.

Yes they certainly do but is that the best guide to prove that oil wasn't the reason or that getting it means play nice and make it cheap again?

Meanwhile 10 years of mass coincidences / massive blunders / privacy invasions / wars without end steam roll on and that's all it is, silly theorists, bless em' :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well as we are talking of debates, thought Id add something else here ... "Chemtrails" .. this is a little more closer to home for everyone, and again there are debates on what they are / for etc ... ive seen them here over my house, lots of people do its hard to ignore ... well, unless you ignore it of course :)

I plucked this video out of many, some are more doom than others ... so ... thoughts? Do you see them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calius. Seriously? Come on man. Scientific Studies Regarding Aircraft Contrails and Cloud Formation. Contrails are nothing but water vapor or ice crystals formed as hot exhaust hits cold air. The hydrocarbon fuels create water vapor as it is burned and complete combustion in any internal combustion engine (yes, jet engines are internal combustion engines) results in nothing but water vapor and carbon dioxide being release. I'm sorry bud, but your latest post really pushes the boundaries of credibility. Whomever made that youtube video is an idiot. It took all of thirty seconds to realize that. I don't understand this need to take even established, scientifically-proven events, and turn them into some sort of bogeyman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought you would post that Para :) Nice and dismissive no debate required, nothing to see here, move along folks. To think I would not know about contrails before posting and just thought every white line is a danger isn't why i posted it. That 1 video of thousands, have a look at some more, unless you assume they are all idiots without questions so no need to bother.

I'm sorry bud, but your latest post really pushes the boundaries of credibility.

You love that word dont you. Seems to me anything remotely off kilter with general public opinion and official line (what this thread is about mainly) is in fact low in credibility in your mind, so I'm quite happy to accept that view from you, I post with information in mind, not to validate myself to you or anyone else, people have their own minds regardless of me or you.

It took all of thirty seconds to realize that.

No, it took all of 30 seconds for you personally to dismiss it outright, your choice on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contrails are nothing but water vapor or ice crystals formed as hot exhaust hits cold air.

True, contrails are just that. And they usually disappear within 30 seconds. Some stick around for slightly longer depending on air temperature and other factors, but they don't stick around for hours and spread out over a vast area.

Chemtrails do stick around and spread out though, and they are becoming very common everywhere. And then they fall to the earth and poison living things. Living things that keep the earth working right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought you would post that Para :)Nice and dismissive no debate required, nothing to see here, move along folks. To think I would not know about contrails before posting and just thought every white line is a danger isn't why i posted it. That 1 video of thousands, have a look at some more, unless you assume they are all idiots without questions so no need to bother.

Truth is not a matter of debate, nor is truth a matter of consensus. You can debate the facts all you like, but they aren't going to change. To be honest, I think that some of these conspiracy nuts are idiots, because they believe such outlandish things. I wish that you wouldn't let some of these people influence your thinking so much. I'm getting a bit frustrated with you, to be honest. Others can post all the evidence they want, and you outright ignore it. Links, pictures, testimony from experts ... you ignore it all.

@ LongRange: I hope you're kidding.

Edited by Parabellum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...